《广东省深圳市新开办药品零售企业验收标准》共29项，其中关键项目（），一般项目（）？_法律法规类（公共）_全学科试题题库

当前学科：法律法规类（公共）

题目：单选
《广东省深圳市新开办药品零售企业验收标准》共29项，其中关键项目（），一般项目（）？
答案： <查看本题扣1积分>

查看答案

答案不对？请尝试站内搜索

推荐知识点:

知觉图用较少的因子（）清晰地表现品牌之间的关系，具有高度的直观性和灵活性。

洋葱的风味前体是S-（1-丙烯基）-L-半胱氨酸亚砜，是由（）转化来的。

进行环境影响评价时，可能造成重大环境影响的，应当编制环境影响报告书，对产生的环境影响进行（）。

在商务谈判活动中，谈判双方实力相当，谁都没有明显的优势时，可以运用()技巧，以达到打破相持不下局面的目的。

男，25岁，沈阳人，肥胖，BMI为36，2009年12月4日起发热，起病前5天曾去海南旅游，当地甲型H1N1流感流行，体温39℃，伴全身肌肉酸痛、乏力；3天后出现咳嗽、咳脓痰，伴右侧胸痛，出现进行性的呼吸困难。根据患者的主诉，应首先考虑以下哪个诊断可能性大（）

8岁男孩，4年前诊断急淋白血病，L2型，T细胞型，标危型，一直坚持化疗。半年前结束治疗，3天前发现左侧睾丸肿大，有伴疼痛，诊断为睾丸白血病复发，应进行哪项治疗：（）

符合渗出液的是（）

高纯水的测量方法有哪些？有什么优点？

每个学生必须遵守的最基本的日常课堂行为准则是（）。

根据以下资料，回答题。On a five to three vote, the Supreme Court knocked out much of Arizona’s immigration law Monday-a modest policy victory for the Obama Administration.But on the more important matter of the Constitution,the decision was an 8-0 defeat for the Administration’s effort to upset the balance of power between the federal government and the states.In Arizona v.United States, the majority overturned three of the four contested provisions of Arizona’s controversial plan to have state and local police enforce federal immigration law.The Constitutional principles that Washington alone has the power to “establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization ”and that federal laws precede state laws are noncontroversial .Arizona had attempted to fashion state policies that ran parallel to the existing federal ones.Justice Anthony Kennedy, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and the Court’s liberals, ruled that the state flew too close to the federal sun.On the overturned provisions the majority held the congress had deliberately “occupied the field” and Arizona had thus intruded on the federal’s privileged powers.However,the Justices said that Arizona police would be allowed to verify the legal status of people who come in contact with law enforcement.That’s because Congress has always envisioned joint federal-state immigration enforcement and explicitly encourages state officers to share information and cooperate with federal colleagues.Two of the three objecting Justice-Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas-agreed with this Constitutional logic but disagreed about which Arizona rules conflicted with the federal statute.The only major objection came from Justice Antonin Scalia,who offered an even more robust defense of state privileges going back to the alien and Sedition Acts.The 8-0 objection to President Obama turns on what Justice Samuel Alito describes in his objection as “a shocking assertion assertion of federal executive power”.The White House argued that Arizona’s laws conflicted with its enforcement priorities,even if state laws complied with federal statutes to the letter.In effect, the White House claimed that it could invalidate any otherwise legitimate state law that it disagrees with . Some powers do belong exclusively to the federal government, and control of citizenship and the borders is among them.But if Congress wanted to prevent states from using their own resources to check immigration status, it could.It never did so.The administration was in essence asserting that because it didn’t want to carry out Congress’s immigration wishes, no state should be allowed to do so either. Every Justice rightly rejected this remarkable claim. Three provisions of Arizona’s plan were overturned because they