Affirmative action b. Relative poverty c. Relative deprivation d. Amalgamation 2. A fixed standard based on a minimum level of subsistence below which families should not be expected to exist is called a. scapegoating. b. absolute deprivation. c. relative deprivation. d. total discrimination. 3. The denial of opportunities and equal rights to individuals and groups for prejudices or other arbitrary reasons is a. prejudice. b. discrimination. c
Premium Discrimination Affirmative action Racism
The Significance of the Right to Effective Counsel in a Criminal Case and Powell v. Alabama The right to counsel is a fundamental common law principle that aims to set a fair criminal trial. The right to have the assistance of counsel for defence is the right of a criminal defendant to have a lawyer assist in his defence‚ even if he cannot afford one. This right comes from a variety of sources‚ the first one being the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution‚ which is the part of the United
Premium Law United States Constitution Jury
contract with Medtronic was unenforceable and offered him a job. Hughes accepted. Medtronic filed a suit‚ alleging wrongful interference. Which type of interference was most likely the basis for this suit? Did it occur here? Explain. [Medtronic‚ Inc. v. Hughes‚ 2011 WL 134973 (Minn.App. 2011)] (See Intentional Torts against Persons.) Answer: For this suit‚ there is a wrongful
Premium Contract Tort Reasonable person
Subashini Rajasingam v. Saravanan Thangathoray & Other Appeals [2008] 2 CLJ 1 FC Summary of the case: (4 marks) There were three appeals (02-19-2007(W)‚ 02-20-2007(W) and 02-21-2007(W)) before us and with the agreements of the parties‚ they were heard together. The parties to the three appeals were originally Hindus husband and wife; they were married pursuant to a civil ceremony of marriage that was registered on 26 July 2001 pursuant to the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976 (the 1976
Premium Marriage Appeal
Right to Remain Silent Tayfun Tokac CRJ 411 Professor Wilson One of the landmark cases in our history which affected the law enforcement is Miranda v. Arizona case. This case had a significant impact on law enforcement in the United States‚ by making what became known as the Miranda rights part of routine police procedure to ensure that suspects were informed of their rights. Ernesto Miranda was arrested for kidnapping and rape of an 18 year old girl by Phoenix Police Department. Mr. Miranda
Premium Miranda v. Arizona Police
Eisenstaedt v. Baird II. CITATION: 405 U.S. 438 (1972) III. FACTS: On April 6th‚ 1967 at Boston University in William Baird violated Massachusetts law at the time when he handed a condom and a package of Emko vaginal foam to an unmarried 19 year old young woman. At the time of the incident‚ under Massachusetts state law “Crimes against Chastity” makes it a felony for anyone to give away a drug‚ medicine‚ instrument‚ or article for the prevention of conception except in the case of (1) a
Premium Supreme Court of the United States United States United States Constitution
Abington Township v Schempp Date: Decided In June 17‚ 1963 or Feb 27‚1976 Problem: Schempp filed suit on the Abington school district for requiring students to read verses from the Bible in Pennsylvania. Outcome: Schempp argued that it was unconstitutional‚ violating religious freedom. Part of the constitution: The First amendment: exercise of free religion‚ speech‚ and press The fourteen amendment: Never should any state impede the life‚ liberty‚ or property of a person Precedent: Got
Premium Supreme Court of the United States First Amendment to the United States Constitution United States
Casey (1992). The decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) reaffirmed Roe v. Wade (1973). The issue addressed was‚ if any state can force a woman seeking an abortion to wait 24 hours‚ if married‚ require consent from her husband‚ and‚ if she’s a minor‚ have parental consent (Oyez). The case was a 5-4 decision in favor of Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania. This decision reaffirmed Roe v. Wade. The Court upheld the 24-hour waiting period and the parental consent
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Planned Parenthood v. Casey Roe v. Wade
Introduction There have been many Supreme Court cases that dealed with many concepts of the law‚ like obscenity for example. As a matter of fact‚ obscenity is a concept that Miller v. California deals with. To be more specific‚ this case deals with what is considered obscene‚ and if the specific obscenity mentioned in this case is protected by the first amendment‚ the freedom of speech. I will now explain this case in more depth. What brought this case about? In 1973‚ Marvin Miller‚ operator
Premium First Amendment to the United States Constitution Obscenity Supreme Court of the United States
TOPIC 1: PERSONAL IDENTIFICATION (THÔNG TIN CÁ NHÂN) My name’s Ha. I’m a teacher and I work in the air force and air depend academy. I’m thirty two years old. I live in Son tay town. My telephone number is 0985812676. In my family there’re three people: my wife‚ my son and I. My wife is a teacher‚ too. She’s thirty one years old. My son is six. I like music and sports espessionly football and volleyball. I’m friendly with other people. TOPIC 2: HOUSE AND HOME (NHÀ CỦA TÔI) My house is small
Premium Food and drink