The argument that might be used by someone who supports strict campaign finance laws is that Corporations and labor unions that have too much power.
Financial law is defined as the law and standard or regulation of the derivatives, insurance, commercial banking, investment management sectors, and capital markets.
The people that support the strict campaign finance laws are the companies or corporations and the labor unions because they have a too much power in the finance laws.
learn more about the finance laws here
brainly.com/question/515053
#SPJ4
Answer:
Corporations were not initially held criminally responsible for corporate activities. A corporation is considered to be a legally fictitious entity, incapable of forming the means rea necessary to commit a criminal act. Initially, corporations have not been accused of corporate responsibility. A corporation is classified as legally fictional, unable to provide the means for committing a crime. In 1909, the Supreme Court rejected this proposal. A corporate who is held criminally liable for it’s employees criminal conduct may suffer financially and criminally. A corporation can be held liable for the criminal acts of it’s employees as long as the employees are acting within the scope of employment and their conduct benefits the corporation. A corporation cannot be imprisoned or punished like individuals.
Explanation:
I'm not sure if this helps but it is the best i can do
Criminal Profiling is a legitimate law enforcement technique that uses knowledge, training, and experience to narrow a field of suspects during a criminal investigation. Factual information, patterns of activity, and motives are some of the aspects considered when using criminal profiling to identify a suspect
Answer:
"It is a fair summary of constitutional history that the landmarks of our liberties have ... the center of one of many national civil liberties disputes in the late 20th century. ... For example, the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights guarantees citizens the ... Government, then, cannot interfere in an individual's freedom of worship.
Explanation:
