Answer and Explanation:
Jusnaturalist School: According to this school, a law must, above all, directly address the promotion of justice in any type of situation, respecting the maximum natural right of the individual, which is an inalienable right that must be respected at any cost. . Based on this school, the situation shown in the question above is inadmissible, as it does not promote justice, it prevents innocent people from traveling via respecting their religion and still hurts their natural right.
Teleological School: This school has a strong political character and states that a law that achieves a social balance and promotes and is the service of protection and promotion of policies that protect society, it is valid. In relation to the case shown in the question above, this school can claim that the law is correct, since there have already been many cases of terrorism caused by Muslims, making their ban on boarding a promotion of social security.
2. When analyzing these two schools of legal thought in relation to the case shown in the question above, I came to the conclusion that the Jusnaturalist school is the one I most agree with. This is because prohibiting Muslim women from boarding an airplane because of terorist cases that they were not part of is a strong example of religious prejudice and intolerance, in addition to hurting the rights of innocent women.
Answer:
is the leader in wall mountable table mounted secure charging cabinet for rugged tablet
Answer:
c. Spencer will win because regardless of whether Glen was acting within the scope of his employment, Sally is liable for his negligence.
Explanation:
Spencer will win because regardless of whether Glen was acting within the scope of his employment, Sally is liable for his negligence. Sally is obligated for his carelessness. Since Sally employed Glen and the obligation of any carelessness turns into Sally's inevitably.
Answer: He has provided an advanced order of moving.
Explanation:
Answer:
The correct answer is A. Decided during the Constitutional Convention of 1787, this accommodation onrepresentation in the proposed US House of Representatives tacitly acknowledged slavery and kept the Southern slave states from rejecting the Constitution. It was called the Three-Fifths Compromise.
Explanation:
The Three-Fifths Compromise was a compromise reached between delegates from the southern states and delegates from the northern states during the Constitutional Convention in 1787. The debate centered on on the fact whether slaves would be counted at the same time as determining the total population of a state to determine legislative representation and for taxative functions. The matter was important, while that population number then used to determine how many seats the state would have in the House of Representatives for the next ten years. The effect was to give the southern states one-third more seats in Congress and one-third more votes they would otherwise have, allowing slave interests to largely dominate the United States government until 1865.
