According to Florida law, the thing that should be done with a badly discolored Uscg-approved pfd with a torn strap is to:
- <u>Discard and replace the PFD.</u>
<u />
A PFD is a personal flotation device that is worn by any person that is going on a boat ride in the ocean or for whatever reason is going to the river or ocean.
This helps the person wearing it to stay buoyant if he falls inside the water and protects him from drowning if he unexpectedly falls into the water.
USCG-approved PFD according to Florida law are supposed to be in good conditions at all times and if any one becomes badly discolored or damaged, then it should be discarded and replaced.
Therefore, the correct answer is <u>Discard and replace the PFD.</u>
Read more here:
brainly.com/question/10574949
Answer:
a. The Equal Protection Clause is a clause from the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The clause provides that "nor shall any State [...] deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws".
Its purpose is to apply substantially more constitutional restrictions against the states than had applied before the Civil War. Hence, in Shaw v. Reno, 509 U.S. 630 (1993), Supreme Court held that redistricting based on race must be held to a standard of strict scrutiny under the equal protection clause while bodies doing redistricting must be conscious of race to the extent that they must ensure compliance with the Voting Rights Act.
While in the case of Easley v. Cromartie, 532 U.S. 234 (2001), Supreme Court held that the State violated the Equal Protection Clause in drawing the 1997 boundaries was based on clearly erroneous findings.
b. In the case of Easley v. Cromartie, an appeal from the decision given in hunt v. Cromartie was filed in the supreme court of the United States by Easley. In hunt v. Cromartie, the court held that the legislature of North Carolina did not use the factor of race while drawing the boundaries in the twelfth congressional district,1992. It was held by the court that the legislature did not violate the equal protection clause of the constitution and no evidence to prove that legislature set its boundaries on a racial basis rather than a political basis.
In Easley v Cromartie the appeal was that drawing the boundaries for voting violated the equal protection clause of the constitution. The supreme court of the United States held that the decision of the district court is erroneous because it actually relied upon racial factors and this is not in the interest of the state.
In Shaw v. Reno the court concluded that the plan of North Carolina tried to segregate the voters on the basis of race.
Answer:
i don't understand what you mean by that
Answer:
proportion is 0.34
Explanation:
given data
total child = 106
hemophilia type = 36
bleeding or blood disorders = 70
to find out
proportion of people in the group that have classic hemophilia
solution
we will apply formula directly to find proportion
proportion are = 
proportion = 0.34
