despite services in the military African Americans returned to find that Jim crow's laws were still in place
As the state of the economy and the issues surrounding gaps in income inequality continue to absorb the national spotlight, some may wonder what exactly any of the numbers that are thrown around in the media actually say about, well, anything. What does it mean when the unemployment rate drops? Does that mean people are finding jobs and the economy is improving? What do any of the numbers surrounding unemployment really say about the state of the economy?
Recently you may have heard that the unemployment rate has dropped. While that is true, it does not necessarily indicate a positive occurrence. According the jobs report of December, 74,000 jobs have been added to the economy, and the jobless rate is down to 6.7%. Adding jobs and seeing a decrease in the jobless rate, both sound like really good things on the surface. Upon further examination of what exactly these numbers mean, the poor state of employment across the country begins to reveal itself.
Answer:
the are said by the current president.
Explanation:
brainliest pls :3
Answer:
In Katz v. USA (1967), the most important Fourth Amendment case, the defendant was sentenced by a federal court for illegal gambling. He organized them using a long-distance telephone, which was the crime against federal law. The judge admitted evidence to the trial in the form of telephone recordings of the accused received by the FBI agents. They installed eavesdropping equipment outside the telephone booth with which the accused called while committing a crime. The Supreme Court rejected the conviction.
Despite the fact that in the Katz case, the Court emphasized the protection of a person’s private life, rather than premises, it made one reservation: “The Fourth Amendment should not be construed as a basis for the adoption of a common “right to privacy.”
The decision in the Katz case is of great importance also for another reason. Judge Harlan, who joined the majority opinion, defined the criteria subsequently used by the courts to establish a violation or non-violation of the Fourth Amendment as a result of specific actions by the authorities. This criterion is called “reasonable expectation of privacy.” The criterion is based on two premises: first, a person must show a valid (subjective) expectation of respect for the right to privacy; secondly, this expectation must be of such a kind that society can recognize it as "reasonable."
Explanation:
