The SCOTUS did not rule that T.L.O’s 4th amendment (searches and seizures) rights had been violated. They ruled that the school administrations search of the bag was reasonable under the circumstances (i.e T.L.O. Being a minor and on school property, meaning that while at school, administration is responsible for the well-being and safety of all students, thus allowing them to search T.L.O’s bag for marijuana). A good way to think of it is that while you’re at school, the administration acts as your parents. Your parents don’t need a warrant to search through your room and neither does the administration if you are on school property. The 4th amendment applies to this case because it protects against unlawful searches and seizures (i.e. searches and seizures that are without a warrant). The constitutional question was whether or not T.L.O. Could be charged with a crime/punished or not because the school administration did not have a warrant. However, because the school administration was acting as a loco parentis (latin term for “in place of the parent”) they did not need a warrant to search her bag. Hope this helped!
Under small bridge or anything that will pretty much hit the top of the car
Answer:
A. Right-of-way should be given to the flow of traffic.
Explanation:
Right of way which is the right given to people that are on the road in-order to make use of the road before others are part of the rules and regulations guiding road usage.<em> In the case of the scenario given above, the Right-of-way should be given to the flow of traffic. That is why most buses re-entering the traffic needs to wait till there was minimal traffic before re-entering those traffic.</em>
Answer:
Perhaps to avoid people getting emotionally hurt?
Explanation:
Answer:
D)To show why the state of nature is inadequate for determining what our fundamental rights should be.
Explanation:
John Locke, an English philosopher, widely referred to as Father of Liberalism, examines the "State of Nature" for the purpose of showing why the state of nature is inadequate for determining what our fundamental rights should be.
According to him, each individual in a society has a natural right to protect his or her own life, liberty, and property and at the same time, each individual has a natural right to seek for compensation for any wrongful injury to his or her natural rights; life, liberty, or property which has been inflicted by other individuals.
However, Locke, believed that, since 'state of nature' is more or less a state of insecurity, that is, each individual is not secured to possible infringement of his or her natural rights by other individuals. Hence, the needs to create a civil government, whose purpose is to protect the natural rights, freedom and well-being of all members of society.
This is because, in a "state of nature" there is no legislative or judicial authority that members of the society can seek for help in order to protect their natural rights, such as lives, liberty, or property. But to ensure there is security and protection to individuals natural right, there is need for a civil government, with a judicial authority whose purpose is to resolve disputes fairly and equitably.
