Eli can request that the prospective juror be removed from the jury by making a "challenge for cause." A challenge for cause is when a lawyer or party to a case asks the judge to excuse a potential juror due to the juror's beliefs or values, in this case, that "all women are killers." The judge will determine if the prospective juror can still be fair and impartial, and if not, the juror will be dismissed.
A challenge for cause is a request made by an attorney to remove a prospective juror from a trial panel because of a specific reason that shows the juror cannot be fair or impartial. In this case, if a prospective juror states a belief that all women are killers, it could indicate a bias or prejudice against women that could prevent them from being fair and impartial in Roxy's trial. Eli could request a challenge for cause to remove the juror from the panel based on this bias. The judge would then decide whether or not to grant the challenge for cause and remove the juror from the panel.
Learn more about the prospective juror:
https://brainly.com/question/30089719
#SPJ11
"Why are minorities (Predominately Black & Latino) arrested/incarcerated at a higher rate than other races"
Explanation:
Black and Latinx Americans in each state, identifies three contributors to racial and ethnic disparities in imprisonmentwhat cases established the policy of judicial review?
The principle of judicial review was established by the landmark case Marbury v. Madison in 1803.
This case established the Supreme Court's power to review the laws of Congress and to invalidate those that conflicted with the U.S. Constitution. In the ruling, Chief Justice John Marshall argued that it was the Court's responsibility to determine the constitutionality of laws and to act as the ultimate arbiter between the government and its citizens. The Judicial review ensures that laws adhere to the constitutional framework and also acts as a check on the power of Congress. This process has become a cornerstone of the American system of government, providing a way for citizens to challenge laws passed by the legislature.
Know more about Marbury v. Madison here:
https://brainly.com/question/19334594
#SPJ11
valley mart told its employees that they would be fired if they actively supported a unionizing effort. valley mart has committed an unfair labor practice T/F
The statement "valley mart told its employees that they would be fired if they actively supported a unionizing effort, valley mart has committed an unfair labor practice" is true because it is considered an unfair labor practice under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).
The correct answer is true.
The NLRA is a federal law that protects employees' rights to organize and engage in concerted activity to improve their wages, benefits, and working conditions. This includes the right to form or join a union, bargain collectively with their employer, and engage in other concerted activities for mutual aid and protection.
Valley Mart's statement that employees would be fired if they actively supported a unionizing effort is considered an unfair labor practice under the NLRA because it is a form of interference, restraint, or coercion that can intimidate employees and chill the exercise of their protected rights.
To know more about National Labor Relations Act, visit:
https://brainly.com/question/8726856
#SPJ4
Dana, an engineer, is hired to oversee construction of a new bridge in San Francisco. When the bridge collapses due to faulty construction, Dana is sued by those injured in the collapse under a theory of Negligence. As a professional, Dana is held to the same standard of care (duty of care) e) as:A) the ordinary reasonably prudent person in general society B) reasonably prudent member of her profession in the same or similar communityC) a person of average intelligenceD) none of the above
As a professional, Dana is held to the same standard of care (duty of care) as a reasonably prudent member of her profession in the same or similar community. The correct answer is B.
This means that Dana is expected to possess the knowledge and skill that is ordinarily possessed by members of her profession and to exercise a reasonable degree of care and diligence in the performance of her professional duties. The standard of care is higher for professionals than for ordinary people, as professionals are expected to have specialized knowledge and expertise in their field, and are therefore held to a higher standard of accountability.
The correct answer is B.
You can learn more about professional duties at
https://brainly.com/question/29975203
#SPJ11
Some laws exist that require administrative agencies to be open to the general public.
True or False?
Answer: True
Explanation:
For officers who routinely use racial profiling as a justification for making traffic stops (without any other factors involved), a ______ form that must be filled out for every stop might be the tool to make the officer re-think his or her conduct
For officers who routinely use racial profiling as a justification for making traffic stops , a stop search form that must be filled out for every stop might be the tool to make the officer re-think his or her conduct
If an officer frequently uses racial profiling as a rationale for conducting traffic stops without considering any other factors, a "stop and search" form that must be completed for each stop may be the instrument to force the officer to reconsider his or her actions. The officer must record the reason for the stop as well as any additional pertinent information, such as the demeanor of the driver or the vehicle's condition, on the stop and search form.
This documentation would produce a record of the stop that superiors may review and possibly utilise to spot racial profiling trends. Every stop must involve the completion of a form, which might serve as a disincentive to cops who might otherwise use racial profiling. The use of stop and search forms may help to lessen instances of racial profiling in law enforcement by boosting accountability and openness.
Read more about the racial profiling on:
https://brainly.com/question/1129431
#SPJ4
qualified domestic relations order, is the 10% ira early withdrawal penalty waived in a divorce $10,000
The given statement "qualified domestic relations order, is the 10% ira early withdrawal penalty waived in a divorce $10,000" is true. In a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) related to a divorce settlement, the 10% early withdrawal penalty for IRA distributions is waived on the portion awarded to the former spouse.
In the case of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) related to a divorce settlement, the 10% early withdrawal penalty for IRA distributions is waived on the portion of the distribution that is awarded to the former spouse.
This means that if the former spouse receives $10,000 from an IRA distribution as part of a QDRO, they will not have to pay the 10% early withdrawal penalty, even if they are under 59 1/2 years old. However, the distribution may still be subject to ordinary income tax, depending on the circumstances.
To know more about divorce settlement:
https://brainly.com/question/29855786
#SPJ4
T/F. One correctional policy decision that may influence who becomes a correctional client is that street crimes warrant more attention from police.
The decision that street offences require extra police attention is one correctional policy choice that may have an impact on who enrols as a correctional client. True.
The decision that street offences require extra police attention is one correctional policy choice that may have an impact on who enrols as a correctional client. Rather than being motivated, this is widely acknowledged to be a bodily incursion driven by a desire for violent compulsion.
Several patients can be taken out of institutions thanks to medications that prevent abnormal behaviour. The majority of those found guilty of violent crimes did so while under the influence of some kind of illicit substance. Only in particular situations are classification judgements susceptible to sociopolitical forces.
Learn more about correctional policy or system Visit: brainly.com/question/13592260
#SPJ4
what social media platform is now the focus of a bill in congress that might essentially ban it because of its ability to gather data about those in the u.s. who use it?
The social media app TikTok is now the focus of a bill in congress that might essentially ban it because of its ability to gather data about those in the U.S. who use it. It has been accused of using its algorithm to track the activities of its users and then selling that data to third parties.
This bill is being introduced in response to growing concerns about the app's ability to gather data on users in the United States, and about how this data could be used to track and monitor individuals. The bill seeks to ban it from operating in the United States unless the company agrees to restrict its data collection practices and to increase the privacy protections available to American users.
In conclusion, the proposed bill in Congress highlights the increasing concerns over the collection and usage of user data by social media platforms.
To know more about privacy protections go to
https://brainly.com/question/30751214
#SPJ4
In 100 words or more, discuss what the different options are for sketch perspectives and what the forensic lab plays within crime scene investigation.
Where people fall on the ideology spectrum is known as the _____.
Name the agency whose primary mission is to reduce crashes, fatalities, and property loss involving large trucks and buses by regulating the workers involved
A.) Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
B.) Surface Transportation Board
C.) Federal Marine Commission
D.) Federal Aviation Agency
The agency whose primary mission is to reduce crashes, fatalities, and property loss involving large trucks and buses by regulating the workers involved is the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. (A)
The FMCSA is a government agency that works to reduce commercial motor vehicle accidents and fatalities by enforcing regulations, providing educational resources, and conducting research.
The FMCSA operates under the Department of Transportation (DOT) and is responsible for the safety of commercial motor vehicles in the United States. The FMCSA's main goal is to reduce accidents, injuries, and fatalities involving large trucks and buses.
The FMCSA regulates drivers, vehicles, and carriers involved in transporting goods or passengers in interstate commerce, including:Commercial motor vehicle drivers (truck and bus drivers)
Motor carriers, including for-hire carriers, private carriers (e.g., businesses that use trucks to transport their own goods), and carriers engaged in interstate commerce.
To know more about government agency click on below link:
https://brainly.com/question/31115038#
#SPJ11
questionwhich group describes the elements of the supreme court decision in the dred scott case? box with group a and group b. group a lists slaves were not citizens, slaves could not bring lawsuits, slaves were property, government could not restrict slavery. group b lists slaves could bring court cases, states could determine whether slavery was permitted, slaves would continue to be counted as three-fifths of a free person, government could require a balance between slave states and free states responsesgroup agroup agroup b
Group A describes the elements of the Supreme Court decision in the Dred Scott case.
Group A lists: slaves were not citizens, slaves could not bring lawsuits, slaves were property, and government could not restrict slavery.
Group B lists: slaves could bring court cases, states could determine whether slavery was permitted, slaves would continue to be counted as three-fifths of a free person, and government could require a balance between slave states and free states.
The Supreme Court decision in the Dred Scott case was a major ruling in 1857 that had long-reaching effects on the United States. The decision stated that slaves were not citizens, so they could not bring a lawsuit, and slaves were treated as property.
The ruling also stated that the government could not restrict slavery, as it was considered a form of private property. Additionally, it stated that states could determine whether slavery was permitted, and slaves would be counted as three-fifths of a free person.
Finally, it was determined that the government could require a balance between slave states and free states.
To know more about Supreme Court click on below link:
https://brainly.com/question/12848156#
#SPJ11
because of double jeopardy, a person found not guilty of a criminal offense cannot also face a civil charge for the same alleged actions (T/F)
The statement "Because of double jeopardy, a person found not guilty of a criminal offense cannot also face a civil charge for the same alleged actions" is FALSE because double jeopardy applies only to criminal cases, not civil cases.
Double jeopardy is a legal principle that prohibits a person from being tried for the same crime twice after they have been acquitted (found not guilty) of that crime. The principle is rooted in the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution, which states that no person shall "be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb."
So, if a person has been acquitted of a criminal charge, they cannot be retried for the same charge again. However, they can still face a civil charge for the same actions if a plaintiff chooses to bring a civil lawsuit against them.
This is because civil and criminal cases are separate legal actions with different purposes and outcomes. In a criminal case, the government seeks to punish a defendant for breaking the law, while in a civil case, a plaintiff seeks compensation for damages suffered as a result of the defendant's actions.
Therefore, the statement "because of double jeopardy, a person found not guilty of a criminal offense cannot also face a civil charge for the same alleged actions" is false.
Learn more about double jeopardy here:
https://brainly.com/question/12229144
#SPJ11
contrast the roles that the house and senate play in the impeachment and conviction process by matching each chamber to its correct roles
Senate: involves a vote that needs a two-thirds majority in order to convict or acquit the defendant. While the House: starts the impeachment process with a vote that needs a simple majority.
Speaker, majority and minority leaders, assistant leaders, whips, and a party caucus or conference make up the House leadership. The speaker serves as the head of the House and fulfills a number of institutional and executive responsibilities. On the House floor, the majority and minority leaders represent their respective parties. Two senators represent each state in the Senate, which has 100 members.
Senators were not elected by the general public; rather, state legislatures chose them until the 17th Amendment was ratified in 1913. Since then, the citizens of each state have chosen them to serve terms of six years. Each U.S. House of Representatives member represents a Congressional District, or area of their state, with an average population of 700,000. However, senators speak for the entire state.
Learn more about Senate at:
brainly.com/question/24779287
#SPJ4
When talking to his investment clients, broker Adam often refers to tax shelters. This term typically means?
Explanation:
The term "tax shelter" typically refers to a legal method of reducing taxable income and, therefore, the amount of tax owed. Tax shelters can take many different forms, including investment opportunities such as individual retirement accounts (IRAs), 401(k) plans, and annuities, as well as certain types of business expenses or deductions.
A proactive police anticrime strategy is practiced when police
a. look for the crime.
b. receive information about the crime.
c. initiate the strategy.
d. profile criminals.
Proactive police anticrime strategy is practiced when police initiate the strategy. police anticrime strategy is a method of policing that aims to prevent crime before it occurs.
This is accomplished by identifying potential crime targets and implementing prevention measures before the crime occurs. Proactive police work is critical for crime prevention in a neighborhood or town. This policing approach, also known as community policing, involves police officers collaborating with residents and community groups to develop solutions to problems that contribute to crime.
The proactive police approach involves police taking the initiative to reduce crime. It's characterized by officers working in partnership with the community to identify problems, risks, and other factors that contribute to crime. The community policing model, which is based on this approach, is founded on the premise that a strong partnership between the community and police can result in safer neighborhoods.
Community policing is a proactive policing approach that stresses the importance of partnering with the public to prevent crime, reduce disorder, and improve public safety. Community policing recognizes that the police cannot tackle crime alone and that the public has a role to play in creating and maintaining a safe and secure community.
To learn more about Proactive :
https://brainly.com/question/28109072
#SPJ11
all of these are attitudinal dimensions identified by robert worden as explain differences among individual police officers except which one?
Robert Worden is a criminologist who has studied various dimensions that explain differences among individual police officers.
Some of these dimensions are attitudinal and can influence how officers approach their work and interact with the public. However, one of these dimensions is not identified by Worden.
The attitudinal dimensions identified by Worden include the following:
Authoritarianism: This refers to a preference for strict obedience to authority and a belief in the need for strong social order. Officers high in authoritarianism may be more likely to use force and less likely to tolerate dissent from citizens.
Conservatism: This refers to a preference for traditional values and institutions, such as the family and religion. Officers high in conservatism may be less accepting of social change and more likely to view certain behaviors as deviant or criminal.
Community orientation: This refers to a belief in the importance of working with the community and addressing underlying social problems to prevent crime. Officers high in community orientation may be more likely to engage in community policing and problem-solving strategies.
Cynicism: This refers to a distrust or disillusionment with the effectiveness of police work and the criminal justice system. Officers high in cynicism may be less motivated to perform their duties and may be more likely to engage in unethical or illegal behavior.
The attitudinal dimension not identified by Worden is liberalism, which refers to a belief in progressive social policies and the need for social change. While officers may differ in their political beliefs, Worden did not include liberalism as an attitudinal dimension that explains differences among individual police officers.
learn more about criminologist here
https://brainly.com/question/14313357
#SPJ4
the supreme court determined that enslaved people were property and therefore had no legal rights in .
The Supreme Court determined that enslaved people were property and therefore had no legal rights in Dred Scott v. Sandford case.
The Dred Scott v. Sandford case was heard by the United States Supreme Court on March 6, 1857, and ruled on March 6, 1857. This ruling was delivered by the United States Supreme Court’s Chief Justice Roger B. Taney. The case was between a slave named Dred Scott and his master’s widow, who was then residing in Missouri. Scott’s master had moved to Illinois and the Wisconsin territory, both of which were free territories. Dred Scott argued that he and his family should be freed since they had lived in free territory. Taney dismissed this argument and stated that enslaved people were property and therefore had no legal rights.Learn more about Dred Scott v. Sandford case: https://brainly.com/question/28042544
#SPJ11
the federal court system has exclusive jurisdiction over all but which of the following types of cases?
The federal court system in the United States is responsible for interpreting and enforcing federal laws and the US Constitution.
It is composed of various levels of courts, including district courts, appellate courts, and the Supreme Court. The federal court system has exclusive jurisdiction over certain types of cases, meaning that only federal courts can hear and decide these cases. However, there are some types of cases that do not fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal courts.
One type of case that does not fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal courts is state law cases. State law cases involve legal disputes that arise under state law and are generally heard in state courts. Examples of state law cases include contract disputes, family law matters, and criminal cases involving violations of state law.
Another type of case that does not fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal courts is cases involving small claims. Small claims courts are state courts that handle disputes involving small amounts of money, usually under $5,000. These courts are designed to be accessible to individuals who cannot afford to hire an attorney and are generally less formal than other courts.
Cases involving violations of local ordinances and zoning laws also generally fall under the jurisdiction of state or local courts, rather than federal courts. These cases involve disputes over issues such as property use, building codes, and noise violations.
In summary, while the federal court system has exclusive jurisdiction over many types of cases, including cases involving federal law, constitutional issues, and disputes between states, there are certain types of cases that fall outside of its jurisdiction. State law cases, small claims cases, and cases involving violations of local ordinances and zoning laws are typically heard in state or local courts.
learn more about US Constitution here
https://brainly.com/question/28862908
#SPJ4
jessica can make a well-thought-out, rational argument for why she is opposed to the death penalty. jessica is most likely in piaget's stage of cognitive development.
Jessica is likely in Piaget's stage of formal operational thought, as she is able to make a well-thought-out, rational argument.
This stage occurs between ages 11 and 15, when people are able to think abstractly, make logical deductions, and consider hypothetical situations.
In this stage, people can form an opinion about something, such as the death penalty, based on their own logic and values. Jessica may oppose the death penalty on moral grounds, based on the potential for wrongful conviction or its potential lack of deterrence.
She may also have a utilitarian argument against it, as execution costs are often more expensive than life imprisonment. Whatever the argument, Jessica has the capacity to form an opinion and make a reasoned argument in Piaget's formal operational stage.
To know more about death penalty click on below link:
https://brainly.com/question/25182125#
#SPJ11
) c evaluate arithmetic expressions in a precise sequence determined by the rules of operator precedence and associativity.
Expressions with higher-precedence operators are evaluated first arithmetic expressions in a precise sequence determined by the rules of operator precedence and associativity.
Operator precedence is a rule that specifies which operations in a given mathematical expression should be executed first.
When parentheses are not present, how operators with the same precedence are grouped depends on a property called operator associativity.
The C programming language primarily provides the following five arithmetic operators:- The addition symbol (+)
Operator for subtraction (-)
Operator for multiplication ()
Operator for division (/)
Modulus operator (%) 5.
The same precedence of division, multiplication, and modulus is higher than the same precedence of addition and subtraction. Additionally, when operators with the same precedence appear in an expression, their associativity is used to evaluate the expression.
Learn more about operator precedence at:
brainly.com/question/30637106
#SPJ4
charitable organizations are not included in the do not call list prohibitions established by the federal trade commission (ftc).
It is false that the charitable organizations are not included in the do not call list prohibitions established by the federal trade commission (ftc).
The Do Not Call List prohibitions established by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) are designed to protect consumers from unwanted telemarketing calls. These rules prohibit most telemarketing calls to consumers who have registered their numbers on the Do Not Call List. While the Charitable organizations are one of the organizations that are exempt from the Do Not Call List prohibitions. The FTC also states that charitable organizations must provide a toll-free number that consumers can call to request that the organization not make any more calls to them.
To learn more about prohibit click here https://brainly.com/question/30516430
#SPJ1
Discuss in 100 words or more, the purpose of AFIS and why it is so important in crime scene investigation.
________ refers to the bargained-for legal value that one party agrees to pay or provide to secure the promise of another.A) ConsiderationB) AgreementC) ReformationD) Restitution
Consideration refers to the bargained-for legal value that one party agrees to pay or provide to secure the promise of another. The correct answers is option a.
What is consideration?Consideration is a necessary element of a contract. It is the value given in return for the promise or performance of another. In simpler terms, consideration is the "price" that is paid for the promise of the other party. Consideration must have legal value and be bargained for. In the absence of consideration, the contract would be considered a gift. A contract is not enforceable without consideration. Consideration can take various forms, including money, goods, services, or a promise to do something. In short, it is the mutual exchange of something of value that distinguishes a contract from a gift.
Learn more about Consideration here: https://brainly.com/question/27027695
#SPJ11
If an applicant submits false or misleading statements or submits a license, certificate, or diploma that was illegally or fraudulently obtained in his or her application for licensure, which of the following may occur?
The Board may refuse to issue the license, certificate or registration, or if it was already issued, there may be a disciplinary action up to and including suspension.
If an applicant submits false or misleading statements or submits a license, certificate, or diploma that was illegally or fraudulently obtained in his or her application for licensure, the Board may refuse to issue the license, certificate or registration, or if it was already issued, there may be a disciplinary action up to and including suspension.
What is meant by the term misleading? A misleading statement is one that appears to be factual but is incorrect, intended to deceive or misguide. Misleading information is information that is presented in such a way as to make it seem factual or impartial when it is not. It can be through half-truths, distorted data, or outright falsehoods. An act is defined as fraudulent if it is carried out with the intention of deceiving another person or entity to gain a financial or personal benefit.
Read more about consequences here:https://brainly.com/question/8776848
#SPJ11
Assume that Iowa has passed a law requiring that motorcycle owners must ensure that anyone riding or operating their motorcycle wear a helmet. Marta enters an Iowa Harley-Davidson store and wants to take a test ride. She doesn't have a helmet with her and the dealership doesn't have one available in her size, so the proprietor lets her go without one. If she crashes and is injured, the proprietor has committed negligence per se.
True or False
The statement "If she crashes and is injured, the proprietor has committed negligence per se" is True. Why is this True? Negligence per se is a legal term that refers to a party being automatically considered negligent because they violated a law or regulation that was established to protect the safety of the public.
When a party breaks a law or rule that was created to protect the safety of the public, it is assumed that they have been careless, and it is typically easier to prove that they were negligent in causing an accident. The given case fits the conditions of negligence per se as the Iowa state requires that anyone riding or operating their motorcycle must wear a helmet.
Since Marta did not wear a helmet while test-riding a motorcycle, which was owned by the proprietor who let her go without one, it could be assumed that the proprietor did not take reasonable care for Marta's safety. Therefore, the proprietor committed negligence per se.
To know more about negligence per se refer here:
https://brainly.com/question/12177870#
#SPJ11
Why did the Supreme Court overturn Miranda's conviction?
The Supreme Court overturned Miranda's conviction in the landmark case Miranda v. Arizona (1966) because they found that his Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights had been violated during the interrogation process.
The Court ruled that Miranda's confession was not admissible as evidence because he had not been informed of his right to remain silent and his right to an attorney.
The Court held that the Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination requires that an individual in police custody be informed of their right to remain silent before being interrogated.
Additionally, the Court held that the Sixth Amendment right to counsel requires that an individual be informed of their right to an attorney before and during any questioning. The Court found that Miranda had not been informed of these rights before his confession and that therefore his confession was not voluntary or knowing.
The Court's ruling in Miranda v. Arizona led to the development of the "Miranda warning," which is the advisement that law enforcement officers are required to give to individuals in custody before conducting custodial interrogations.
The Miranda warning informs individuals of their right to remain silent and their right to an attorney, and failure to provide this warning can result in any resulting statements or confessions being excluded as evidence in court.
Learn more about Miranda right here:
https://brainly.com/question/2209921
#SPJ11
What is the effect of fines on companies who are found guilty of price fixing? They take a huge financial hit, deterring them from repeating the crime. The fine they pay is much less than the profit they made from their crime. They must refund all the money they made from their crime. The fine is a penalty that causes most of them to go out of business
Option A: The effect of fines on companies who are found guilty of price fixing is that they suffer a severe financial loss, which discourages them from doing the offense again.
Companies that are found guilty of price fixing can face severe financial consequences as a result of fines, which can act as a strong deterrence to such offenses in the future.
Depending on the seriousness of the offense and the size of the organization implicated, these fines may reach millions or even billions of dollars. The notion is that the fine must be severe enough to deter the corporation from repeating the same anticompetitive behavior.
The objective is to deter the corporation from participating in unlawful acts that hurt customers and other businesses rather than forcing them out of business.
Learn more about price fixing at
https://brainly.com/question/13062335
#SPJ4
The question is -
What is the effect of fines on companies who are found guilty of price fixing?
a. They take a huge financial hit, deterring them from repeating the crime.
b. The fine they pay is much less than the profit they made from their crime.
c. They must refund all the money they made from their crime.
d. The fine is a penalty that causes most of them to go out of business.
a ____ is an order requiring that an official bring a specified prisoner into court and show the judge why the prisoner is being kept in jail.
An "order to show cause" is an order issued by a court or judge requiring an official (such as a jailer) to bring a specified prisoner into court and show the judge why the prisoner is being kept in jail.
This order can be used when a prisoner requests to be released on bail, when a prisoner seeks a writ of habeas corpus, or when a prisoner claims to be wrongly imprisoned. An order to show cause must provide the judge with sufficient evidence that there is a legal basis to continue to hold the prisoner in jail. If the official fails to show cause, the court may order the prisoner's release.
In order for an order to show cause to be issued, the court must have a legal basis for requiring the official to bring the prisoner in for a hearing. This can include evidence that the prisoner poses a danger to the public, that the prisoner may be a flight risk, or that the official has failed to follow proper procedure in the case. When the court reviews the order to show cause, it will determine if the evidence provided by the official is sufficient to continue the prisoner's detention. If the court finds that the evidence is not sufficient, the prisoner must be released.
The order to show cause is an important tool in ensuring that prisoners are not held unlawfully and that they are treated fairly. It can also be used to ensure that officials are properly carrying out their duties, and that they are adhering to the law when it comes to detaining prisoners. By issuing an order to show cause, the court can ensure that the official has the necessary evidence to detain the prisoner and that the prisoner has the right to a fair hearing.
For such more questions on judge
https://brainly.com/question/30606281
#SPJ11