The legalization of drugs is neither unwise nor immoral. It is not unwise because by legalizing drugs we would eliminate the illegal drug trade. Hence, by legalizing drugs, we would rid our nation of all the violence that goes along with the illegal drug trade. Furthermore, the legalization of drugs is not immoral because it can be combined with a massive program of moral education. The conclusion in a standard argument form is often presented as __________

Answer:

The Supreme Court's opinion in the Brown v. Board of Education case of 1954 legally ended decades of racial segregation in America's public schools. Originally named after Oliver Brown, the first of many plaintiffs listed in the lower court case of Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, KS, the landmark decision actually resolved six separate segregation cases from four states, consolidated under the name Brown v. Board of Education. While the attorneys originally argued the cases on appeal to the Court in 1952, the featured document, School Segregation Cases - Order of Argument, offers a window into the three days in December of 1953 during which the attorneys reargued the cases.

A reargument was necessary because the Court desired briefs from both sides that would answer five questions, all having to do with the attorneys' opinions on whether or not Congress had segregation in public schools in mind when the 14th amendment was ratified. The document lists the names of each case, the states from which they came, the order in which the Court heard them, the names of the attorneys for the appellants and appellees, the total time allotted for arguments, and the dates over which the arguments took place.

The first case listed, Briggs v. Elliott, originated in Clarendon County, South Carolina, in the fall of 1950. Harry Briggs was one of twenty plaintiffs who were charging that R.W. Elliott, as president of the Clarendon County School Board, violated their right to equal protection under the fourteenth amendment by upholding the county's segregated education law. Briggs featured social science testimony on behalf of the plaintiffs from some of the nation's leading child psychologists, such as Dr. Kenneth Clark, whose famous doll study concluded that segregation negatively affected the self-esteem and psyche of African-American children. Such testimony was groundbreaking because on only one other occasion in U.S. history had a plaintiff attempted to present such evidence before the Court.

Explanation:

Answer:

d. may agree to a new contract that includes the new price.

Explanation:

A contract can be defined as an agreement between two or more parties (group of people) which gives rise to a mutual legal obligation or enforceable by law.

There are different types of contract in business and these includes: fixed-price contract, cost-plus contract, bilateral contract, implies contract, unilateral contract, adhesion contract, unconscionable contract, option contract, express contract, etc.

Mutual assent is a legal term which represents an agreement by both parties to a contract. When two parties to a contract both have an understanding of the parameters, terms and conditions surrounding a contract, it ultimately implies that they are in agreement; this is generally referred to as mutual assent.

Since the original contract has been completely rescinded (declared void, repealed or annulled), Bistro and Corporate may agree to a new contract that includes the new price based on mutual assent between the two parties.

Answer:

Criminal law

Explanation:

Answer:

Mindhunter

America's Most Wanted

Criminal: UK

Public administrators play a crucial role in aiding federal agencies, such as the Department of Health and Human Services and the Transportation Security Administration.

On a local level, public administrators organize efforts to improve communications and share data between public safety services

Answer:

Explanation:

networks

Guided Reading Activity

Economic Systems

Lesson 1 Scarcity and the Science of Economics

Review Questions

Answer: People who think that the law is not fair can approach the court to decide on the issue. The court has the power to modify or cancel laws if it finds that they don't adhere to the Constitution.