In the looking at diversity feature "socioeconomic stereotyping" christa kilvington, a straight-a student and single mother on public assistance, suggests that the stereotypes people use to classify her shape the way they communicate with her.

Passport video produced a video documentary titled the definitive elvis, comprising sixteen one-hour episodes. the producers interviewed more than 200 people regarding virtually all aspects of elvis's life. passport sold the videos commercially for a profit. approximately 5 to 10 percent of the videos were composed of copyrighted music and appearances of presley on television and in movies owned by copyright holders other than passport. passport did not obtain permission to use those copyrighted works. elvis presley enterprises, inc., and other companies and individuals that owned copyrights to the presley works used by passport sued passport for copyright infringement. passport defended, arguing that its use of the copyrighted materials was fair use. the u. s. district court held in favor of the plaintiff copyright holders and enjoined passport from further distribution of its documentary videos. passport appealed. did passport act ethically in including the elvis presley copyrighted material in its video? why do you think passport video did so? has there been fair use in this case, or has there been copyright infringement?

A. in weeks v. united states (1914), the court established the exclusionary rule, which was incorporated to the states in mapp v. ohio (1961), and the court established the concept of a "good faith exception" to the exclusionary rule in united states v. leon (1984). in their opinion, the supreme court pointed out that compliance with the exclusionary rule can have a cost to society (criminals can go free) that outweighs the benefits (stopping illegal searches by police). ultimately, the court determined that despite the exclusionary rule, evidence can still be admitted in situations where police made genuine "good faith" efforts to act legally, but technically acted illegally, in obtaining the evidence. explain the exclusionary rule good faith exception and explain and support whether you agree or disagree with the concept of a good faith exception to the exclusionary rule? why or why not? use the lesson notes and/or one news source to support your answer.

How can congress clarify parts of the constitution that are unclear?