The question is incomplete. This is the complete question:
Which of the following is not a permissible circumstance under which to implement a prior restraint, under Near v. Minnesota?
a. obscene publications.
b. Fighting words likely to promote immense violence.
c. Obstruction of military recruitment.
d. Publication of troop movement in the time of war.
Answer:
The answer is b. Fighting words likely to promote immense violence.
Explanation:
Although it is possible for certain words to cause immense violence when used in publications, under Near v. Minnesota (a United States Supreme Court decision which declared that prior restraints on publication violated the freedom of speech and press) it is still not permissible to implement a prior restraint, even when publications use fighting words that are likely to promote immense violence.
Long-term assets are the term capital mean in the context of making capital expenditure decisions
Funds used by a business to purchase, improve, and maintain tangible assets including land, buildings, machinery, plants, and other property are known as capital expenditures. Capital expenditures is frequently utilized by businesses to launch new initiatives or investments. Repairing a roof (if it extends the usable life of the roof), buying equipment, or constructing a new factory are all examples of capital expenditures on fixed assets. These kinds of financial investments are made by businesses to broaden the scope of their activities or to provide some potential economic benefit.
Capital expenditures are payments made for products or services that are recorded or capitalized on a business's balance sheet as opposed to being deducted from earnings.
Learn more about Capital expenditures here
brainly.com/question/16001079
#SPJ4
Explanation:
In addition to ending the political intrigue surrounding the election, Jefferson's inauguration and the Democratic-Republican takeover of Congress set an important precedent. It marked the first peaceful transfer of power between political parties in American history.
Answer:
A void contract
Explanation:
A void contract is one that appears to be an agreement but lacks an essential requirement for validity and enforceability. A void contract is usually illegitimate contract which cannot be enforceable. For example, an agreement between a drug trafficker and his clients is a void contract because it is illegal.
