Answer: interesting....
Explanation: im in need of points :P
The answer is D, all of the above!
The statement is true as the court reversed itself as the New Jersey court did regarding automobile search being the right decision to prevent crimes.
Stare decisis is Latin for "to hold fast to what has been decided." If a prior court has made a ruling on the same or a closely comparable matter when a court is faced with a legal argument, the court will follow that precedent when making its conclusion.
On September 24, the New Jersey Supreme Court upheld a decision that allowed police to search cars without first obtaining a warrant. No state rule or subjectivity is present in this situation, negating the need for such state-specific judgments. The court made the correct judgment to go in the opposite direction as the New Jersey court did with regard to car searches.
However, as in-state v. Witt, a new jersey supreme court case discussed in class, where a court will reverse itself as the new jersey court did regarding automobile searches stands TRUE.
To know more about the rule of stare decisis, refer to this link:
brainly.com/question/4997437
#SPJ4
Whistleblowing occurs when an employee reports illegal conduct at work that is not related to workplace rights. For example, you are a whistleblower if you report that your company is cooking the books; engaging in shareholder fraud; producing faulty, dangerous, or mislabeled products; or lying on its tax returns.
When a product fails to perform as warranted, this is called a) contractual liability. O b) product malfunction. c) malicious manufacture. d) breach of warranty
can you heelp me ! :)
