Answer:
The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. It prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures. In addition, it sets requirements for issuing warrants: warrants must be issued by a judge or magistrate, justified by probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and must particularly describe the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.
<h2>Main answer:-</h2>
False
Answer:
The cabinet is the second highest level of executive branch bureaucracy pyramid.
Explanation:
The cabinet being the second in authority within the executive branch, it has the functions of advising the president on matters dealing with the specific cabinet office.
The president comes first in the pyramid, followed by the cabinet and then the leaders.
The cabinet helps the president with the administration duties in their respective offices.
The cabinet is also among the people members who can take up power in case of a vacancy in the presidential seat.
Answer:
Answer:
Such society exists even today in Middle East, Africa, Tibet, Middle Asia and Northern part of Nepal.
These societies rely on the cultivation of fruits, vegetables, and plants in order to survive. such societies are often forced to relocate when the resources of the land are depleted or when the water supplies decrease.The technological advances led to an increase in food supplies, an increase in population, and the development of trade centers.
Answer:
Split the Government into a Diarchy type situation
The Emperor leads Domestic Affairs, while the Shogun leads Military affairs within japan, create a parliament full of the daimyo so that internal politics becomes easier, and have the samurai act as Guards for important people in government.
This is just a brief idea, and the Shogun would likely just take back control, although I believe you can provide the checks and balances.
Answer: 4. Regents of the University of California v. Bakke
Explanation:
In June 1978, the Supreme Court declared that affirmative action was legal insofar as racial quotas were not used. The case was brought by a white California man, Allan Bakke who said he had suffered reverse racism as he had higher scores than minority group members but was refused admission because of a University rule that reserved 16% of admission slots for minority groups. The Supreme Court ordered the University to admit Bakkie as using quotas was unconstitutional but also held that race can be used as a valid factor in admissions decisions.
This showed that affirmative action was legal but subject to scrutiny.
