Answer:
an executive agreement is the agreement between 2 or more executives where as a treaty is the agreement between the states
Explanation:
The primary difference between an executive agreement and a treaty lies in their formation and ratification process. A treaty is a formal agreement between countries that requires negotiation by the president, consent by a two-thirds vote in the Senate, and ratification by the president. An executive agreement, which is more commonly used in recent times, is negotiated and approved by the president alone, or in the case of congressional-executive agreements, requires a simple majority vote in both the House and Senate.
The U.S. Constitution outlines a specific process for treaty-making in Article II, stressing the formalities involved, including Senate approval by a two-thirds vote. However, the majority of international agreements the U.S. enters today are in the form of executive agreements because they are less onerous to enact. Executive agreements have the same force as treaties while in effect, but unlike treaties, they do not require the Senate's approval, making them more flexible and easier to implement or rescind by subsequent administrations. For instance, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Paris Climate Agreement were both executive agreements rather than treaties. In the landmark United States v. Pink case, the Supreme Court deemed executive agreements as legally equivalent to treaties, as long as they do not change federal law.
Jack has been released from confinement early and placed on probation. He found a job and rented an apartment in his hometown. One day, he responded to a knock on the door and sees his probation officer, Stephanie Stone. She tells him that she has decided to conduct a surprise inspection of his home. Jack insists that he has been a very good citizen and is no longer involved in any criminal behavior. Stephanie has no evidence that this is not true, but insists on conducting a complete search of the home anyway. Stephanie finds nothing out of the ordinary, but asks if Jack will follow her to the office for a drug test, just in case. Jack says, "Sure, I have nothing to hide." Unfortunately for Jack, the drug test is positive for an illegal substance and his parole is revoked.
Was Parole Officer Stone's search of Jack's apartment lawful?
Answer:
Yes it is lawful.
Explanation:
A sentence of probation is actually an alternative of a jail sentence. The Courts have found that probationers have reduced expectations of privacy so they don't have the same Fourth Amendment rights as others. Courts can require probationers to submit to warrantless searches not supported by probable cause. The goal is only to help rehabilitate the probationer, protect society, or both.
Although officers usually need warrants or probable cause before they can search a person or home, a search condition eliminates this requirement. In some states, an officer must have reasonable suspicion before conducting a probation search, but in others, an officer can conduct searches at any time, even without reason to believe that the probationer committed a crime. Some of these search conditions allow only probation officers to search, while others authorize both probation and police officers to do the same
The Fourth Amendment typically prevents police from searching someone’s body, belongings, or home without a warrant or probable cause. But judges gives a condition of sentencing someone to probation, that the probationer agree to warrantless searches. Since this condition does not entitled the probationer’s normal Fourth Amendment rights, it’s sometimes called a “Fourth waiver.”
The legality of Parole Officer Stone's search of Jack's apartment depends on the specific conditions of Jack's parole arrangement. While parolees often have conditions that allow searches by a parole officer without the need for a warrant or probable cause, the exact terms of Jack's parole would need to be assessed to determine the lawfulness of the search.
While on parole, individuals may have conditional rights compared to the general public, often subject to terms that can include regular searches by a parole officer. With no evidence of ongoing criminal behavior by Jack, the legality of the search could depend on the specific conditions of Jack's parole, which typically allow for searches without the need for a warrant or probable cause.
In a similar educational context, school officials were found justified by the District Court to conduct searches based on reasonable suspicion, as per the question's reference to the search of Savanna's belongings. This principle may extend to parole scenarios where the law provides parole officers certain liberties to conduct searches to ensure parole compliance. However, it's vital to consider whether the search was in accordance with the conditions stipulated in Jack's parole agreement, as well as state and federal laws concerning parolee rights. If the conditions did allow such searches, Officer Stone's action could potentially be lawful. Nevertheless, without specific information on Jack's parole conditions, a definitive answer cannot be provided.
What is meant by ""insure domestic tranquility"" in the preamble of the u.S. Constitution?
In a dissenting opinion, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg stated, that ______ laws are a tool for suppressing minority votes. Select one: a. civil rights legislation b. affirmative action c. Voter ID d. strict scrutiny test e. reasonable basis test
Answer:
The correct answer is c: Voter ID laws.
Explanation:
To begin with, it is necessary to define what voter ID laws are. They are laws which require voters to evidence their identity before a ballot is cast. In other words, the voter must provide some kind of official identification in order to be allowed to vote. Many say that this system avoids fraud. Others, like Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, claim that these laws are used as a tool so as to discourage the poor and disabled from voting. Requiring a voter ID discriminates against minority groups, such is the case of African Americans, Hispanic people, the elderly, and transgender individuals, among other minorities. It appears that it is not as easy as it seems to get an ID or another type of document you need to present when you vote.
Some states require a Photo ID, others a Non-Photo ID, and some others states do not require any ID whatsoever.
The Sedition Act of 1798 which punished individuals for publishing “false, scandalous, and malicious writing” about the government is now infamous and thought to have violated the right of freedom of expression. What agency had the responsibility for enforcing the Sedition Act when it was in effect?
1.the Secret Service
2.the US Marshals Service
3.the local police
4.the United States Postal Inspection Service
Answer:
2) The US Marshals Service
Explanation:
Timothy Pickering was in charge of enforcing the Sedition Act. The US Marshals Service is a federal agency in charge of enforcing laws. Therefore you could assume that Pickering worked for the US Marshals Service.
Final answer:
The US Marshals Service was responsible for enforcing the Sedition Act of 1798, which targeted material deemed harmful to the government.
Explanation:
The agency responsible for enforcing the Sedition Act of 1798 was the US Marshals Service. When the act was in effect, it was enforced by the federal government primarily through its judicial system and the marshals who executed the arrest and imprisonment of individuals charged under the act. Notably, the Sedition Act of 1798 is often confused with the Espionage Act of 1917 and the Sedition Act of 1918, the latter of which did involve the United States Postal Inspection Service in its enforcement. However, regarding the 1798 act, the US Marshals played a central role in taking action against those who published material deemed 'false, scandalous and malicious' against the federal government.
The declaration of independence reflects the principle of
Answer:
Popular Sovereignty.
Explanation:
The principle of popular sovereignty state that it is the consent of the people that creates and sustains the state and its government through the elected representatives.
The people are source of all political power. this principle is associated with Thomas Hobbs, Rousseau and John Locke, all three were social contract philosophers. Declaration of independence also reflects this principle because it declare that it is the prole who instituted the government for themselves and it derives power from their consent.
Describe your 5 layers of citizenship (home, school, city, state, nation).
List examples of rights at each layer
List examples of responsibilities at each layer
Identify the source of rights and responsibilities at each level.
Answer:
Home:
Follow and respect the rules Do your part in taking care of the environmentVolunteer in community organizationsBe respectful to your friends, neighbors, family, etc.Help people in need.Have a good understanding of the government.Be a good personSchool:
being respectful of other people and their property.being respectful of school property.following school rules.displaying good character (responsibility, honesty, good listening, kindness)City:
Volunteer to be active in your community.Be honest and trustworthy.Follow rules and laws.Respect the rights of others.Be informed about the world around you.Respect the property of others.Be compassionate.Take responsibility for your actionsState:
basically the same thing as for the city.
Nation:
Support and defend the Constitution.Stay informed of the issues affecting your community.Participate in the democratic process.Respect and obey federal, state, and local laws.Respect the rights, beliefs, and opinions of others.Participate in your local community.Hope I helped answer the question!