Answer:
terry v. ohio
Explanation:
Terry v. Ohio, in 1968, was a major decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court ruled that the Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures is not in violation when a police officer stops a suspect on the street and frisks him or her without probable cause to arrest, if the police officer has a reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime and has a reasonable belief that the person "may be armed and presently dangerous."
The concept of enforcement districts or precincts was contributed by whom?
Ans: Romans
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act which was signed by president Barack Obama in 2010 made significant changes in the provisions of HIPAA
<h3>What is American Recovery and Reinvestment Act</h3>
Basically, the ARRA was a piece of legislation aimed at stimulating the economy.
It included measures to modernize the energy and communication infrastructure and enhance energy independence.
Under ARRA, provisions were made for business associates to comply directly with most provisions of the HIPAA Security Rule.
Learn more about the ARRA at brainly.com/question/1366132
Answer:
No, it would not be legal.
Explanation:
It would be a violation of US law if Congress allowed a United States territory to become a complete state on the condition that its residents choose a new governor. This is because the US Federal Congress is prohibited from limiting the independence, sovereignty and management of a state over its territories. Thus, allowing a territory to become a complete state is a way of limiting state political power within that territory, which means that it is illegal.
