1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
kicyunya [14]
3 years ago
15

From the following, please choose which branch of government may have made the following examples of law, and whether each would

be federal, state, or local law:1.An agreement between Mexico, Canada, and the United States to protect migratory birds. Executive-Federal2.The Compassionate Use Act. Legislative-State3.The necessity of giving the Miranda Warning to persons being arrested.Judicial-Federal4.An ordinance making it illegal to plant Mulberry trees. Legislative-Local5.The right to abortion. Judicial-Federal
Law
1 answer:
Lera25 [3.4K]3 years ago
6 0

Answer:

  1. An agreement between Mexico, Canada and USA would be made by the  Executive because it's the President who sings this kind of agreements.
  2. The Compassionate Use would be legislative because the FDA needs to approve and the are autorized to make laws.
  3. The necessity of giving the Miranda Warning to persons being arrested, it's Judicial because is the "reading" of their rights.
  4. An ordinance making it illegal to plant Mulberry trees, would be made by a Local.
  5. The right to abortion, would be made by a Judicial power because that would mean that it won't be penalized.

Explanation:

  1. It'd be a Federal law.
  2. It'd be a Federal law.
  3. It'd be a Federal law.
  4. It'd be local because there is no Federal or State law who bans such tree.
  5. It'd be a State law. [Each state has the power to decide over this]
You might be interested in
Challenges of separation of power
Scrat [10]
In several Supreme Court decisions this decade, the question of whether a constitutional attack on a statute should be considered “as applied” to the actual facts of the case before the Court or “on the face” of the statute has been a difficult preliminary issue for the Court. The issue has prompted abundant academic discussion. Recently, scholars have noted a preference within the Roberts Court for as-applied constitutional challenges. However, the cases cited as evidence for the Roberts Court’s preference for as-applied challenges all involve constitutional challenges which concede the legislative power to enact the provision but nevertheless argue for unconstitutionality because the statute intrudes upon rights or liberties protected by the Constitution. Of course, this is not the only type of constitutional challenge to a statute; some constitutional challenges attack the underlying power of the legislative branch to pass the statute in question. Modern scholarship, however, as well as the Supreme Court, has mostly ignored the difference between these two different types of constitutional challenges to statutes when discussing facial and as-applied constitutional challenges. In glossing over this difference, considerations which fundamentally affect whether a facial or as-applied challenge is appropriate have gone unnoticed. By clearly distinguishing between these two very different types of constitutional challenges, and the respective role of a federal court in adjudicating each of these challenges, a new perspective can be gained on the exceedingly difficult question of when a facial or as-applied challenge to a statute is appropriate. In this Article, I argue that federal courts are constitutionally compelled to consider the constitutionality of a statute on its face when the power of Congress to pass the law has been challenged. Under the separation of powers principles enunciated in I.N.S. v. Chadha and Clinton v. New York, federal courts are not free to ignore the “finely wrought” procedures described in the Constitution for the creation of federal law by “picking and choosing” constitutional applications from unconstitutional applications of the federal statute, at least when the statute has been challenged as exceeding Congress’s enumerated powers in the Constitution. The separation of powers principles of I.N.S. and Clinton, which preclude a “legislative veto” or an executive “line item veto,” should similarly preclude a “judicial application veto” of a law that has been challenged as exceeding Congress’s Constitutional authority.
6 0
3 years ago
Los determinantes posesivos indican quien ------ algo o a quien
nalin [4]

Answer:

possessive Determinants

Explanation:

Given - The determinants that indicate who owns something or to whom it belongs are the:

Solution -

The determinants that indicate who owns something or to whom it belongs are possessive Determinants.

The determinants possessive tonics always go behind the name to which they refer and agree in gender and number with the noun to the that accompany it . Example : A friend of mine is coming today.

4 0
2 years ago
WILL GIVE BRAINLIEST!!! 100 POINTS ON THE LINE!!!!
Karo-lina-s [1.5K]

Answer:

This article shall take effect two years after the date of ratification. ... Women are still disproportionately poor, suffer from widespread ... opposed equal pay laws and minimum wage increase measures, opposed paid sick

Explanation:

8 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Someone answer fast plsss
erastovalidia [21]

Answer:To simplify finding the law, most all statutes are organized by subject in a set of books called a code. The body of statutes that comprises the criminal law is often referred to as the criminal code, or less commonly as the penal code.

Explanation:

5 0
3 years ago
The first space zone is directly above the vehicle
Anvisha [2.4K]

Answer:

The picture shows the six zones around your vehicle. Straight ahead is the front zones, to the left is the left-front zone, and to the right is the right-front zone. Behind you is the rear zone, the left-rear zone, and the right-rear zone.

Explanation:

7 0
2 years ago
Other questions:
  • Instead of directly addressing the problem, an abuser will medicate it away by indirectly denying its impact for a short while.
    13·1 answer
  • Which of the following is NOT one of the four Ds of negligence? Direct cause Dereliction of duty Damages Defamation of character
    11·1 answer
  • What are the three names that Article 1, Section 8, Clause 18 called?
    8·1 answer
  • To remedy the higher crash rates among young drivers. Is/are being implemented in several states
    9·1 answer
  • Test question test question
    13·1 answer
  • What do candidate centered elections look like?
    12·1 answer
  • 100 POINT QUESTION BEST ANSWER WILL GET 100 POINTS AND BRAINLIEST
    14·2 answers
  • Why did rosa parks refuse to give her seat up
    7·1 answer
  • Discribe the impact of a 300 billion dollar increase in government spending where the marginal propensity is to save .20
    6·1 answer
  • When Lara and Mick cannot resolve their dispute amicably, Lara initiates a lawsuit against Mick. Lara is
    5·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!