They could crash into each other they could also do illegal activities
Answer:
judicial activism
Explanation:
Based on the information provided within the question it can be said that in this scenario this decision is an example of judicial activism. This term refers to a court ruling that is suspected of having been made on the basis of a personal opinion as opposed to an actual existing law. Such as in this case since the court made a ruling on something that is not not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution.
Dutch researcher Geert Hofstede identified four cultural dimensions by studying data on IBM employees from dozens of countries.
The original theory has four dimensions along which cultural values identified as:
- individualism-collectivism
- uncertainty avoidance
- power distance in social hierarchy
- masculinity-femininity
Hofstede's theory is used to understand the differences in cultures round the globe. He started this model on the basis of dissimilarities in values and beliefs relating work goals. The aim of this model was to determine the dimensions in which cultures vary from each other . It is important because it gives useful information regarding variances between countries' culture, values and beliefs and how to manage such cultural differences".
To learn more about Hofstede's Theory,
brainly.com/question/14453085
#SPJ4
Answer: 1. In order to pass legislation and send it to the President for his or her signature, both the House and the Senate must pass the same bill by majority vote. If the President vetoes a bill, they may override his veto by passing the bill again in each chamber with at least two-thirds of each body voting in favor.
2. The President returns the unsigned legislation to the originating house of Congress within a 10 day period usually with a memorandum of disapproval or a “veto message.” Congress can override the President's decision if it musters the necessary two–thirds vote of each house.
3.When the Supreme Court rules on a constitutional issue, that judgment is virtually final; its decisions can be altered only by the rarely used procedure of constitutional amendment or by a new ruling of the Court. However, when the Court interprets a statute, new legislative action can be taken.
Explanation:
