The president has the authority to regulate commerce and other businesses in the country through the issuance of Executive Orders. They are issued from the white house straight to the Executive arm of the government to act accordingly. It is a compulsory requirement and affects the country’s law.
From Trump’s incident of banning the use of Chinese apps for use in the United States, I do not think that he should have interfered. Based on his comments, he argued that it was meant to uphold its security by securing crucial citizen data. It should not be the case, given that there is no evidence to support the argument. Instead, it could have been rational to undertake scrutiny of the accused apps.
According to Trump’s arguments, it is right for the United States government to be part of the deal. It is of goodwill as it enables the government to ensure its citizens benefit from the deal and proper security purposes.
Although the president banned the Chinese apps for security purposes, it was not an appropriate move, given that it could result in ramifications regarding other US businesses in other countries. In such an instance, the commerce clause, the first article, section 8, and clause 3 of the United States Constitution should come into play. The law provides congress with the capability to control commerce and businesses.
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) came into law in 1991, which defines that under no circumstance should US citizens be subjected to discrimination in all public or private places and instances. The law is important given that since it was passed, no individual with a disability is allowed to get access to Jobs, transportation, and schools.
The Electronic Communication Privacy Act of 1986 protects information while being communicated or when stored on electronic devices. It applies to conversations on telephones, emails as well as electronically stored data. The law is important since it restricts the government’s confidential phone calls and electronically stored data.
done in as little as 1 hour
The Fair Credit Report Act purposely ensures the confidentiality of consumers’ files in the credit bureau. Also, it provides privacy as well as fairness. This law defines how credit agencies can access, collect, use, and share consumers’ data.
Employers should scrutinize the credit reports of potential employees before being considered. For security purposes, it is crucial to verification of identity, education, and background to prevent theft or misuse of funds or resources and be able to know the former employer. It is a crucial way of understanding the candidate undertaking its responsibilities.
In any case, the employer rescinds basing it on the employee’s background. It is important to explain to the latter the reasoning for ending the agreement based on the guidelines provided by the company.
For the above case, there was no contract between the two parties. The contract involves a mutual agreement between the two parties. It involves one party ordinarily coming up with an offer and the other one accepting it. In this scenario, there was no agreement for sponsorship for Paul; instead, he made a call to confirm the qualification.
according to your instructions
From the above case, it was not a contract, and therefore there are no legal rules that apply to the same.
There are no legal obligations on the GSU given that it was not a contract and also because terms and conditions for certain scholarships change over time. It was important for Paul to be updated with the offer’s terms.
It would be unethical for the GSU not to honor Paul’s promise. In this case, it is ethical to be consistently honest for whatever purpose an organization wants to undertake. For instance, Paul was assured about the scholarship and was later turned down, and he had picked GSU over others.