For most of United States history, the Bill of Rights was interpreted as protecting individuals from acts of the:
a. federal government.
b. unlawful masses.
c. state legislatures.
d. the President.
A
You might also like to view...
Consider that you are a deputy, and have just reviewed the following principles of contemporary criminal procedure:
a. An involuntary statement is considered to be inherently untrustworthy or unreliable, and convictions based on unreliable evidence violate due process. b. Coercive police practices are a violation of fundamental fairness, an essential element of due process; therefore, a confession coerced by the police violates due process, even if that confession is otherwise reliable. c. Free choice is an essential aspect of due process, and an involuntary confession cannot be the product of a person's free and rational choice. ? In your opinion, sometimes there are situations where force is necessary to gain confessions. With this in mind, but also considering the above prinicples, how forceful is acceptable and why? What are better alternatives? Also, what do you think should have happened to cases where force was exercised prior to the Brown v. Mississippi case? Have you heard of any cases since then that have used force to any degree either? What are your thoughts on those cases? Please fully explain. What will be an ideal response?
Discuss the individual costs and problems suffered by victims of crime
What will be an ideal response?
States have their own constitutions
Indicate whether the statement is true or false
What is the terrorism warning system developed by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security designed to more effectively communicate information about terrorist threats by providing timely, detailed information to the American public?
a. Homeland Security Advisory System b. National Terrorism Advisory System (NTAS) c. Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting Initiative d. Homeland Security Information Network