Facebook Pixel Code
x
We use cookies to create the best experience for you. Keep on browsing if you are OK with that, or find out how to manage cookies.

Supreme court cases

This is a preview of the 4-page document
Read full text

Paulson, wo is the qui tam, hd no jurisdictional ground to file his complaints with the federal court against Greywater. Tis to the Greywater motion which was joined by the defense department in favor, te defense department is supposed to agree to the claims. Te defense department is the one thought to have been defrauded by the security firm according to Paulson. Acording to the department this is not the case, tis gives ground to dismiss the case. Te motive for this is that the division in question has agree that the claims have ground for it to be considered and proceed (Sylvia, 29).

Pulson will be required to prove solidly that whatever the security firm was doing with the Syrian security forces was against their mandate. Te security firm will argue, yu do not live in isolation and ignore everything is fine in a foreign country. Lving in isolation will make them suspicious of your intended purpose in the first place. Te only thing that is required is to have discretion in whatever interaction you have. Tere no security operation that can stay blind without intelligence from their so called enemies and expect to thrive and achieve.

Geywater will claim that the proceedings will jeopardize their operation, ay intelligence gathering and action in case of a response. Te proceedings will also make them targets by the Syrian security forces as they will paint them as spies meddling into their issues (Sylvia, 31). Plitically the proceeding will interfere with the relations between the two governments. Te American government will be painted as one which meddles with the of the Syrian government.

Te resources have not been channeled to another use rather for security purposes still. Scurity interests do not entail only real-time protection, bt also intelligence gathering and being aware of the surrounding circumstances (Sylvia, 32). Te federal court should resolve the case because a violation of the constitution is part of its mandate including, fderal land crimes and bankruptcy cases. A it appears, te case is one that involves violation of the constitution. Te constitution states that senators represent their state through a direct popular Drr claims that he won the elections through a popular vote, bt was snatched the position.

Te reason for this occurrence, s he claims...

This is a preview of the 4-page document
Open full text
Close ✕
Tracy Smith Editor&Proofreader
Expert in: Social science, Archaeology, Culture
Hire an Editor
Matt Hamilton Writer
Expert in: Social science, Psychology, Media
Hire a Writer
preview essay on Supreme court cases
WE CAN HELP TO FIND AN ESSAYDidn't find an essay?

Please type your essay title, choose your document type, enter your email and we send you essay samples

Contact Us