This is a great question with various for and against points so i shall just give you a few that come to mind.
FOR
-conditions can be below to basic living standards, which is immoral and a violation of human rights
-People wouldn't voluntarily pay money to maintain the living conditions of convicts due to the atrocities of their crime.
-Statistics support the fact 'it doesn't work' as rehabilitation is in the minority
-it does not reduce crime rate in the slightest
-corruption
AGAINST
-what is the question suggesting should happen to convicts instead?
-wrongfully convicted
apologies im running out of time, so i can write appropriate against. hope this helps though
Members of Congress represent the people of their district in the United States Congress by holding hearings, as well as developing and voting on legislation. All bills must pass Congress before they can go to the President to be signed into law.
here you go! :D
Answer: regulation
Explanation:
Citizens are allowed to sue federal administrative agencies who are empowered to make specialized rules and regulations that would enable them to properly enforce the mandate given to them by Congress.
Of course one cannot just sue at the first instance, there must have been a series of appeals to various bodies within this agency to repeal the rule or regulation that is causing grief. If those bodies refuse and it is found that the agency did not act in good faith in making the rule, the court will hear an appeal on the matter without exhaustion.
December 15, 1971
Explanation:
the right of the people to be secure in their persons,houses,papers,effects,against unreasonable searches and seizures,shall not be violated,and no warranrs shall issue, but upon probable cause,supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched
