Fort Sumter and they were called The First Battle of Bull Run and the Second Battle of Bull Run. Hope this helps!
Indians used violent as well as peaceful means of agitation against the British rulers. The Congress Party was the largest anti-British organization. Led by Gandhi ji, it used non-violence and satyagraha to press its demands for independence.
Not all the Indians believed in peaceful means, though. The Indian National Army was a military organization that actively fought against the British forces during the Second World War.
There were a lot of revolutionaries also who used bombs and weapons against the British. Some of them were grouped under the Hindustan Republican Army.
Hi there!
I'm glad you've joined Brainly.
During the rise and peak of Islam, a very structured and organized law system was established based according to the Quran and religion which had been highly depended upon. Due to this, many people did not commit crimes, steal, or lie, knowing that their Lord may punish them. Therefore, this all comes down to establish the very core of the matter: the caliph set laws and punishments which were all agreed upon by scholars, community elders, and respected Muslims.
The caliphs of that age had a system which they called Hokm Islami. This translates to Islamic rule without force. Later, the Ottomans established the forced rule for all, based on certain groups and religion types.
Abu Bakr set many limits on himself as other Caliphs had done. This included equality of wealth for all. There had been a treasury which they called "Bait Ul-Mal" , which the Caliph was not allowed to take money from, unless it was to help the community or poor folks. The Caliph also limited himself to water and basic food to live. He lived in a humble home as other men did.
Aside from money, the Caliph Abu Bakr also made sure that he did not order anything unless it was backed by the Quran, and agreed upon.
I hope this helped. If not, please comment below and I'd certainly be glad to elaborate and add to this description. Thanks! :)
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:
The historical origins of the free enterprise system are different for each perso just look around on google
