Answer:
Explanation:
Issue: Can an institution of higher learning use race as a factor when making admissions decisions?
Result: The Court held that universities may use race as part of an admissions process so long as "fixed quotas" are not used. The Court determined that the specific system in place at the University of California Medical School was "unnecessary" to achieve the goal of creating a diverse student body and was merely a "fixed quota" and therefore, was unconstitutional.
Importance: The decision started a line of cases in which the Court upheld affirmative action programs. In 2003, such academic affirmative action programs were again directly challenged in Gratz v. Bollinger and Grutter v. Bollinger. In these cases, the Court clarified that admission programs that include race as a factor can pass constitutional muster so long as the policy is narrowly tailored and does not create an automatic preference based on race. The Court asserted that a system that created an automatic race-based preference would in fact violate the Equal Protection Clause.
Answer:
A market for cats would have had a positive externality.
Because the cats would kill the rats on sight since that is their natural behavior.
However, it is interesting to mention, that the cat's killing has been more of a "mythic" aspect of this story, since it fails to take into account that since the black death was caused by the<em> yersinia pestis</em> bacteria, cats could have been also infected, and since their interactions with humans are greater than rats or fleas, the real outcome could have been totally unexpected.
Answer:
Individuals are said to be collaborating when the art of getting things done through people
I believe the answer is: C.casuistry
casuistry refers to a form of reasoning that sound clever when being said but is based on non-logical reasoning. Usually, Casuistry commonly can be heard when people with excellent communication skills is speaking about the topic related to morality.
