The statement is true as the court reversed itself as the New Jersey court did regarding automobile search being the right decision to prevent crimes.
Stare decisis is Latin for "to hold fast to what has been decided." If a prior court has made a ruling on the same or a closely comparable matter when a court is faced with a legal argument, the court will follow that precedent when making its conclusion.
On September 24, the New Jersey Supreme Court upheld a decision that allowed police to search cars without first obtaining a warrant. No state rule or subjectivity is present in this situation, negating the need for such state-specific judgments. The court made the correct judgment to go in the opposite direction as the New Jersey court did with regard to car searches.
However, as in-state v. Witt, a new jersey supreme court case discussed in class, where a court will reverse itself as the new jersey court did regarding automobile searches stands TRUE.
To know more about the rule of stare decisis, refer to this link:
brainly.com/question/4997437
#SPJ4
Answer:
Respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms and the principle of holding ... The Rule of Law and Democracy Section stands as OHCHR focal point for ... Since its establishment in 2006, the Human Rights Council (successor to the ... relevant intergovernmental bodies and international organizations, published a .
Explanation:
I think the most accurate answer would be D- Getting in a fight
it would most likely be independent
Answer:
The answer is income taxes.
The federal government relies mostly on revenue from income taxes.
Hope this helps