When protecting the president, the Secret Service must ensure that the president is never more than a few minutes away from a Trauma Hospital.
<h3>
How does the President's security come from the Secret Service?</h3>
The Secret Service is distinct from other federal law enforcement organizations because, in addition to protecting visiting heads of state and governments, the president and vice president of the United States, and their families, as well as former presidents, presidential candidates, and other high-profile individuals, its agents also conduct criminal investigations—the agency's original mandate from 1865.
Both investigative and protective, they.
They need to provide safe sites for the president in case of an assault, locate nearby trauma hospitals, request a motorcade route through town, and clear airspace at the airport during the president's arrival, among other things.
To learn more about the secret service, refer
brainly.com/question/16979419
#SPJ13
Answer:
D
Explanation:
If this answer helped you then please consider making this brainliest and thank this response :)
INTERESTS PROTECTED
The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides that "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." The ultimate goal of this provision is to protect people’s right to privacy and freedom from unreasonable intrusions by the government. However, the Fourth Amendment does not guarantee protection from all searches and seizures, but only those done by the government and deemed unreasonable under the law. To claim violation of Fourth Amendment as the basis for suppressing a relevant evidence, the court had long required that the claimant must prove that he himself was the victim of an invasion of privacy to have a valid standing to claim protection under the Fourth Amendment. However, the Supreme Court has departed from such requirement, issue of exclusion is to be determined solely upon a resolution of the substantive question whether the claimant's Fourth Amendment rights have been violated, which in turn requires that the claimant demonstrates a justifiable expectation of privacy, which was arbitrarily violated by the government. In general, most warrantless searches of private premises are prohibited under the Fourth Amendment, unless specific exception applies. For instance, a warrantless search may be lawful, if an officer has asked and is given consent to search; if the search is incident to a lawful arrest; if there is probable cause to search and there is exigent circumstance calling for the warrantless search. Exigent circumstances exist in situations where a situation where people are in imminent danger, where evidence faces imminent destruction, or prior to a suspect's imminent escape. On the other hand, warrantless search and seizure of properties are not illegal, if the objects being searched are in plain view. Further, warrantless seizure of abandoned property, or of properties on an open field do not violate Fourth Amendment, because it is considered that having expectation of privacy right to an abandoned property or to properties on an open field is not reasonable. However, in some states, there are some exception to this limitation, where some state authorities have granted protection to open fields. States can always establish higher standards for searches and seizures protection than what is required by the Fourth Amendment, but states cannot allow conducts that violate the Fourth Amendment. Where there was a violation of one’s fourth amendment rights by federal officials, A bivens action can be filed against federal law enforcement officials for damages, resulting from an unlawful search and seizure. Under the Bivens action, the claimant needs to prove that there has been a constitutional violation of the fourth amendment rights by federal officials acting under the color of law. However, the protection under the Fourth Amendment can be waived if one voluntarily consents to or does not object to evidence collected during a warrantless search or seizure.
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.
