Answer:
The Johnson-Reed Immigration Act , 1924
Explanation:
The Johnson-Reed Immigration Act was passed making it harder for some Europeans to immigrate to the US, and made somewhat easier for other countries to move the US
The Immigration Act of 1924, also called as the Johnson-Reed Act, was a law of the federal that was passed on May 16, 1924 in the USA intended to limit immigration of population in the US. It, the law banned entry of the entire Chinese population and put strict restrictions to other Asian immigrant groups, and to a fewer extent, on people from Eastern and Southern Europe; but it did not apply to persons from the American continent.
This case will need to be tried at least in a federal and a transnational or international court. Moreover, this will involve both national and international jurisdictions.
In law, there are three main types of courts:
- Constitutional courts.
- Federal courts.
- Transnational courts.
Each of these applies the jurisdiction of the same level. For example, a constitutional court will apply the constitutional laws and specific state laws.
In the case presented, two of these courts are required:
- Federal court: This is necessary because the crime was perpetrated in the U.S. territory, and therefore criminals are judged under U.S. Federal law.
- Transnational court: Considering the pirates might not be American, and therefore there are at least 2 countries involved, it is necessary to consider the case under international maritime laws.
Learn more about law in: brainly.com/question/6590381
Answer:
yes and no
Explanation:
might aswell mark brainliest as well ;)
Based on the given scenario, it can be concluded that a legally binding contract was concluded between X and Y.
This is because, before the agreed date of 20th August, X withdrew her acceptance and sent it by post and also made a call to Y which informed him of her current stance.
<h3>What is a Contract?</h3>
This refers to the legally binding agreement that exists between two or more people about the terms of something.
Hence, we can see that based on the given scenario, it can be concluded that a legally binding contract was concluded between X and Y.
Notwithstanding the arrival of the postal letter of acceptance, this is considered void as there has been a change of terms that have been clearly communicated to the other party.
Read more about contract here:
brainly.com/question/984979
#SPJ1
