Just write your own essay and then use quilbot
Answer:
Option 2 is the right answer
Explanation:
When government obtains any evidence though a conduct deemed unconstitutional (unlawful search or seizure), such evidence would be suppressed by the court. When the defendant is brought to court for eventual trial, such evidence would be inadmissible. U.S courts have used this rule in several occasions, to prevent police officers and agents of the government from abusing constitutional rights of the people.
Hello. This question is incomplete. The full question is:
Ozzy recently started working at a new company. He has been solicited several times to join the union of the company, but he would prefer not to. The union officials tell Ozzy that he won’t be allowed to keep working unless he joins the union. Which of the following is true?
-The union officials are pretending they have a closed shop and can't influence Ozzy's decision.
-The union can't make Ozzy join the union, but it can require him to pay union dues.
-Ozzy must now join the union because union shops are always legal.
-Ozzy's requirement to join the union depends on his state of employment.
Answer:
-The union can't make Ozzy join the union, but it can require him to pay union dues.
Explanation:
There is a law called the National Labor Relations Act that states that no employee should be required to be part of the union and that membership in the union should not be placed as a requirement for the occupation of a particular labor function. However, some states and some companies may adopt different approaches to their employees and the union.
In some states in the country, although an employee is not required to become a member of a union, they allow an obligation for all employees to be required to pay at least part of the union's dues. In this case, we can say that in relation to the case shown in the question above, the union can't make Ozzy join the union, but it can require him to pay union dues.
Desk will be far from each other you would need lots of hand sanitizer and their will be new rules hanged up on walls education will not be affected hard because you probably would not have time to talk about that but you will definitely have new rules
Answer:
In the case of Parsons v. State, 1887, the Irresistible Impulse Test was first introduced.
Explanation:
The Court of Alabama stated that, although it would have been possible that the defendant had right from wrong, that he had "dismissed the power of choice between right and wrong" and that, "at a time when his free organization was destroyed," and that therefore, the alleged crime was so closely related, in relation to cause and effect, to such a mental disease that it has been the result of.
I hope this was understood very well, and as always, I am joyous to assist anyone at any time. ☺️
