<h2>Through t
he concept of prosecutorial immunity.</h2>
Explanation:
In Kalina v. Fletcher (1997), the court ruled that a prosecutor may be sued for making false statements of fact in an affidavit in support of an arrest warrant. This is occurred when Prosecutor Kalina was sued by Fletcher for making two inaccurate factual statements regarding him during his trial.
Prosecutor Kalina, therefore, seeked the provisions of prosecutorial immunity from the court to gain immunity. However, this was rejected as the court claimed that a prosecutor may be sued for making false statements of fact in an affidavit in support of an arrest warrant.
This ruling correlate with the concept of prosecutorial immunity becuase she was denied of such immunity. It ruled that her conduct could not be protected through prosecutorial immunity.
British people did many bad things which cost them support. They implemented taxes as they saw fit, not caring about the people. They would make the common people house soldiers or be punished. They would block ports if the colonists would object, or punish them severely in many other ways.
Smith argued that by giving everyone freedom to produce and exchange goods as they pleased (free trade) and opening the markets up to domestic and foreign competition, people's natural self-interest would promote greater prosperity than with stringent government regulations.
There were several ways in which the US government increased Mexican immigration, but the best option is "congress passed laws saying that all Latinos fleeing dictators are welcome"
The correct option here is the third one.
A market economy is the one where the companies are free to operate as the like with only minimal interference of the government. The market here is decided by the powers of the supply and the demand while the government influence is strictly there in a regulatory sense, to protect the rights of the costumers.
