Answer:
The best response of the options provided is Option B: Conflict theory.
Explanation:
The best choice of the options provided is conflict theory because conflict theorists take a critical stance toward existing social arrangements like the way that illness is defined. This can affect the access that people without power have to services or to livelihood, if the way that the powerful define illness works to their disadvantage in some way. An example would be denying someone disability status because their condition is not recognized as an illness that can affect productivity. This could make it so the person who is less powerful has to continue working despite their illness or disability and it may deny them benefits.
The answer should be 3, or do you need to know the 3?
The correct answer for this question is this one:
There are so many decisions 5 to 4 because these decisions varies form one judge to the other. The other decision that is common is 9-0. The reason behind this is because many of the court’s cases don’t divide along ideological<span> lines. They might disagree and sometimes don't care.</span>
Thanks to decisions by the Supreme Court, home ownership in the United States is more inclusive of other races apart from White Americans.
Both before and after the Fair Housing Act formally made it illegal to discriminate based on a person's race and gender, the Supreme Court made some decisions that tried to make home ownership more inclusive such as:
- Shelley v. Kraemer - here the Supreme Court ruled that it was not possible to enforce covenants in the deeds to property that were restrictive based on race.
- Jones v. Mayer Co. - the Supreme Court ruled that any form of racial discrimination in home ownership was illegal
These are just two cases where the Supreme Court's decision affected homeownership but there are more.
We can conclude however, that based on the Supreme Court's decisions, homeownership is more inclusive of other races.
<em>Find out more at brainly.com/question/2630375.</em>
