1. Accord and satisfaction
That’s the only one I will answer but I hoped it helped a little
Answer:
Sexual harassment is a type of harassment involving the use of explicit or implicit sexual overtones, including the unwelcome or inappropriate promise of rewards in exchange for sexual favors. Sexual harassment includes a range of actions from verbal transgressions to sexual abuse or assault
Explanation:
The United States Supreme Court ruled in Baker v. Carr (1962) held federal courts could review claims that a state's redistricting of electoral lines violates the Equal 14th Amendment Amendment to the Constitution.
About Equal Protection Clause
The United States Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment's first section contains the Equal Protection Clause. The article states that "neither shall any state deny to any individual within its authority the equal protection of laws." It came into force in 1868. It demands that the law treat people equally who are in similar circumstances. Civil Rights Act of 1866's equality provisions were a major driving force behind the inclusion of this paragraph.
To know more about Baker v. Carr:
brainly.com/question/29398317
#SPJ4
Courts applying the Davis exception most often summarize it with phrases such as "ongoing emergency" or "emergency situation." When police are responding to an ongoing emergency, their motive is to ensure the safety of all concerned, not to collect evidence. The Supreme Court ruled in Davis that statements elicited by police while responding to an ongoing emergency are not testimonial for purposes of the Confrontation Clause.
Testimonial” hearsay is a statement that:
-ITlooks like the kind of testimony that would be offered at trial in aid of prosecution;
-It is made when the circumstances objectively indicate that there is no ongoing emergency; and
-The primary purpose of the interrogation is to establish or prove past events potentially relevant to a later criminal prosecution.
The Confrontation Clause of the United States Constitution protects the right of a criminal defendant to be confronted by his or her accusers in Court and to cross-examine any testimony that they may offer. The admission of hearsay (an out-of-court statement) – even if admissible under an exception to the rule against hearsay – can be in direct conflict with the right of Confrontation.
On the other hand, “non-testimonial” hearsay is a statement that:
-It is made primarily for the purpose of assisting police to meet an ongoing emergency; or
-It was made primarily for a purpose other than discovering, establishing or proving past events potentially relevant to later criminal prosecution.
To learn more about Testimony visit here ; brainly.com/question/29244222?referrer=searchResultssearchResults
#SPJ4
technically this is asking your own personal opinion but i will give an asnwer based on my knowledge of it:
"In my personal opinion, it is an unfair clause. If a criminal were to go to court for a crime and walk free he would never be able to be accused of that crime in the future. Detectives are always making new leads in cases and if they were to find any new eveidence, no matter how incriminating it was they would not be able to arrest him a second time.
