Which of the following statements about political parties and the united states constitution is true? iiia ch.8 voc group of answer choices the constitution requires political parties to be restricted by both federal and state law. the constitution indicates that political party leaders at the national level be elected by political party leaders at the state level. the issue of political parties is not addressed in the constitution. according to the constitution, only two major political parties may exist at any time. the constitution specifies that political party leaders must be native-born united states citizens.

Erika is a human resource manager at bluetel inc., a software company. she receives a call from an hr manager at another software company asking about marshall, a software engineer who used to work at bluetel and has applied for a job at the caller's company. erika checks the company's records and sees that a coworker had accused marshall of racial discrimination, but an investigation did not turn up any evidence to support the charge. marshall left the company two months later, saying he was no longer comfortable there. erika is concerned about sharing the details of this situation with the caller. if telling the information to the caller leads to the other company not hiring marshall, what potentially unlawful behavior could marshall accuse bluetel of engaging in?

Which term describes a possible explanation of, or answer to, a scientific question that is based on prior knowledge or research and that is testable?

Arthur met rottweiler breeders lynda and george at a dog show in rhode island. the couple, who reside in new york state, later sold several rottweiler dogs to arthur who lived in rhode island. arthur later sued lynda and george, claiming that the dogs were sick and infirm. he filed a complaint in rhode island courts, claiming that even though the dogs were sold in new york, the breeders had attended the dog show and advertised in the rottweiler newsletter which was distributed at the event in rhode island. based on the facts, do you think rhode island courts have personal jurisdiction in this case?