it is but chkeas
Most schools usually do ACT's over the SAT's, but i believe either test is reasonable. Some people test better than others on the ACT's then the SAT's and vise versa.
If it is a NON-invasive test, such as an exercise test, it might be reasonable. But if it is an INVASIVE test, such as muscle biopsy, then no it would not be reasonable, especially on an otherwise HEALTHY young girl.
Unfortunately, this answer is very vague. The reader can not be sure which 'two test' you are referring to, in either 'pass' or need to be 'take'. What kind of test do you mean, for what purpose are you taking them, how do you 'pass' a test, and why are you obligated to take another two of them? With these questions answered, we can provide you with a reasonable answer.
no, they are subject to the 'reasonable person test'
A reasonable person's opinion deserves consideration in a court of law, but a lunatic's does not.
Any chemist, pharmacy or reasonable supermarket will sell a pregnancy test kit
If an officer has reasonable suspicion to believe you have been drinking and the drinking is related to a crime, he may administer a field sobriety test. Put another way, without reasonable suspicion to believe you have been drinking, an officer under no duty to administer a field sobriety test. Reasonable suspicion is not probable cause. It is a lesser standard.
give the government the benefit of the doubt.
'reasonable' has several different meanings in English: each will correspond to a different word in Latin.If by 'reasonable' you mean 'fair'; aequus is your best word.If by 'reasonable' you mean 'able to understand basic arguments' ('He was a reasonable man'), try sapiens.And so on,
how reasonable something is
The Cunningham test would be justifiable to a persons guilty mind, since the Cunningham test is a subjective test, so the test is mainly on the person who is convicted of the crime. The Caldwell test is an objective test that the jury will give a verdict based on the act of the person whom is convicted of the crime, and that person's mind is whether guilty or not lies in the hand of the jury(reasonable man). The Jury which is the reasonable man is always reasonable, never makes a mistake, and only taking sex and age in to account. An objective test does not confirm the state of mind of the person when he/she is doing the act, and there by, objective test in my opinion is not justifiable to a persons guilty mind when only his/her act is being judged. Therefor the Cunningham test which is the subjective test is better suit.
reasonable means simply not exactly right but close enough