In 1952, at the height of the korean war, a labor dispute threatened to shut down the nation's steel industry and imperil the war effort. to avert a strike, president harry truman, acting as commander in chief, ordered the secretary of commerce to seize and operate several steel mills. but the supreme court found that here the president has overstepped his constitutional authority. it held that only congress, acting under its commerce power, could authorize the seizure of private property in time of war, and it had not done so. this is an example of

The passage below can be revised to make it more concise. which word is a modifier that can be eliminated because it adds no meaning? dr. madison is somewhat skeptical about stories of global warming. she has gathered scientific data in remote areas to prove her position. somewhat global scientific remote

New communication technologies, improved transportation, and advanced military weapons made it possible for countries to speed up acquiring territory. rule large amounts of territory. fight off competition from opposing nations. expand their economies, which aided in conguest.

Research and review one of the following cases: 1. eeoc vs abercrombie and fitch inc. 2. young vs ups 3. vance vs ball state university after you have thought through and understand the case answer the following: 1. explain the facts of the case leading to the dispute. 2. define and show understanding of each of the terms assigned to your case. break the laws into components where necessary. eeoc vs abercrombie and fitch inc: 1) eeoc, 2) title vii, 3) disparate treatment discrimination, 4)disparate impact discrimination vance vs ball state university: 1) eeoc, 2) title vii, 3) hostile work environment, 4) a supervisor for title vii purposes young vs ups: 1) title vii, 2) pregnancy discrimination act, 3)american's with disabilities act, 4) reasonable accommodation 3.how do the above concepts come into play in the case? 4. what rule of law came from the case? what did the court decide? 5. based on your understanding of employment law was the ruling correct? explain using a legal principle.