Answer: It is not.
Explanation:
The U.S. Constitution has a clause known as the Supremacy Clause that places the Constitution of the United States as well as all Federal law that are not in violation of the Constitution above State laws and Constitutions.
This is why Federal Voting rights were able to prevail over the State Constitutions in the South after the Civil War.
For this reason, the Federal Statute enacted by Congress will take precedence over the Wisconsin State Constitutional Provision.
Explanation:
law is a kind of rule that is used in big society . like a city or country.
for example : city law
important note : do not use the word "law" for small societies like a family or a school!!
according to dictionary : law : the whole system of rules in a city or country that all of the people in that must obey .
Answer:
The overview according to the definition of the query is listed in the following part of the clarification.
Explanation:
- Perfect rivalry or competition defines a business system in which a vast handful of similar competitors compete with homogeneous goods against each other.
- Monopolistic, respectively, refers to a business system where a vast number of individual companies compete with distinct goods against one another and.
- An Oligopoly defines a system of the economy where a limited number of businesses are competing against one another and.
- A monopoly depends on the business system where every other market is dominated by a single company.
A i think hope this helps you out
Answer:
probative value
Explanation:
The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides legal protection against search and seizure without good reason and without a search and seizure warrant. As we can see from the question above, Mick Stoner was charged with marijuana, which was taken from a legal dispensary in Denver, seized without a search warrant, so Mick Stoner's defense attorney disputes the evidential value of the evidence, claiming that the truck's initial search violated the Fourth Amendment.
To dispute the probative value of the evidence means that the evidence gathered, in this case, is not guaranteed, by itself, to support a condemnatory sentence, thus requiring the repetition in court of some of the evidence produced.
