Answer:
A committee of military officers governed Mauritania from July 1978 to April 1992. A popular referendum approved the current constitution in July 1991.
The primary task of Mauritania’s successive governments has been to unify a community of diverse ethnic groups that are hierarchical in social structure and very strongly differentiated. The religion shared by all ethnic groups in the country has served as a centripetal force in creating a national culture.
Prime Minister is responsible to the National Assembly for the role of his various ministries as the government President is elected by absolute majority vote through a two-round system. Prime Minister is appointed by the president. Supreme Court is the most supreme amongst Mauritania courts.
Personalities have long exercised an important influence in the politics of Mauritania - the effective exercise of political power in the country depends on control over resources; perceived ability or integrity; and tribal, ethnic, family, and personal considerations.
Explanation:
Answer:
In United States constitutional law, substantive due process is a principle allowing courts to protect certain fundamental rights from government interference, even if procedural protections are present or the rights are unenumerated (i.e not specifically mentioned) elsewhere in the US Constitution. Courts have identified the basis for such protection from the due process clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution, which prohibit the federal and state governments, respectively, from depriving any person of "life, liberty, or property, without due process of law". Substantive due process demarcates the line between the acts that courts hold to be subject to government regulation or legislation and the acts that courts place beyond the reach of governmental interference. Whether the Fifth or Fourteenth Amendments were intended to serve that function continues to be a matter of scholarly as well as judicial discussion and dissent.[1]
Substantive due process is to be distinguished from procedural due process. The distinction arises from the words "of law" in the phrase "due process of law".[2] Procedural due process protects individuals from the coercive power of government by ensuring that adjudication processes, under valid laws, are fair and impartial. Such protections, for example, include sufficient and timely notice on why a party is required to appear before a court or other administrative body, the right to an impartial trier of fact and trier of law, and the right to give testimony and present relevant evidence at hearings.[2] In contrast, substantive due process protects individuals against majoritarian policy enactments that exceed the limits of governmental authority: courts may find that a majority's enactment is not law and cannot be enforced as such, regardless of whether the processes of enactment and enforcement were actually fair.[2]
The term was first used explicitly in 1930s legal casebooks as a categorical distinction of selected due process cases, and by 1952, it had been mentioned twice in Supreme Court opinions.[3] The term "substantive due process" itself is commonly used in two ways: to identify a particular line of case law and to signify a particular political attitude toward judicial review under the two due process clauses.[4]
Much substantive due process litigation involves legal challenges about unenumerated rights that seek particular outcomes instead of merely contesting procedures and their effects. In successful cases, the Supreme Court recognizes a constitutionally based liberty and considers laws that seek to limit that liberty to be unenforceable or limited in scope.[4] Critics of substantive due process decisions usually assert that there is no textual basis in the Constitution for such protection and that such liberties should be left under the purview of the more politically accountable branches of government.[4]
The answer is d.dispatch the proper personnel to a call
Answer:
thorw the case out bc this has happed to ,me
Explanation:
Answer:
Explanation:
Indonesia has more endangered mammal species than any other country, according to World Bank data.
NOAA Fisheries is responsible for the protection, conservation, and recovery of endangered and threatened marine and anadromous species under the Endangered Species Act. The ESA aims to conserve these species and the ecosystems they depend on.
