1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
liraira [26]
3 years ago
11

The constitution ______. contains a long list of enumerated powers for the states leaves open the question of when national law

can be overridden by state action leaves little opportunity for the supreme court to decide national-versus-state power disputes says very little about the powers of the states draws clear lines between state and national powers
History
1 answer:
Setler79 [48]3 years ago
8 0
Says very little about state power
You might be interested in
Appellate jurisdiction refers to
lutik1710 [3]
Appellate jurisdiction refers to the judiciary system and the courts. Appellate jurisdiction is the power of the courts to review the decisions made by a lower court and to change the outcomes of these decisions. This can include a whole new hearing of a case, some of the findings given to a lower court to examine or review particular legal rulings made by a lower court.
6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
The Bush administration helped bring about the collapse of the Soviet Union by .
Lina20 [59]

Answer:

supporting Gorbachev's reforms

Explanation:

President Bush trusted Mikhail Gorbachev more than President Reagan did, and he supported Gorbachev's reforms which led to the eventual collapse of the Soviet Union.

7 0
4 years ago
According to the Constitution, laws passed by Congress must be approved by
blondinia [14]
Okay. State courts are not even on a federal level and the Supreme Court is on a completely different branch. Therefore, B and C are eliminated. The Senate is part of Congress, so D is out as well. The president has to approve the bill or if they veto, be overridden by Congress to become a law. The answer is A: The President.
7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Is there a justification for the US to engage in unilateral rather than multilateral military action overseas
balandron [24]
This is of course a somewhat subjective question, but most would agree that it is generally not acceptable for the US to engage in unilateral rather than multilateral military action overseas, unless there is a direct threat to the safety of the US, since there is almost always collateral damage in these attacks. 
7 0
3 years ago
WILL MARK BRAINLIEST!
Diano4ka-milaya [45]

Answer:

C

Explanation:

Hope it helps!

5 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • What toxic chemical do miners in poverty stricken countries use for mining gold?​?
    7·1 answer
  • Who contributed significantly to United States history from the period 1900 to 1940
    12·2 answers
  • Why does a year consist of 365 days and a day of 24 hours?
    14·1 answer
  • Organ America, Doctors Without Borders, and the Red Cross are examples of
    6·1 answer
  • Which was a cause of breaking off the eastern half of the roman empire?
    11·1 answer
  • Parts of the civil rights movement argued for separation between races. true or false
    15·1 answer
  • In the Hindu religion the sum
    7·1 answer
  • HELP PLS<br><br> which choice correctly shows the social order under feudalism?
    8·1 answer
  • How did religion change the lives of the people and their government in India ?
    6·1 answer
  • Many people think that Europeans enslaved Africans because they (Europeans) believed that Africans were inferior to them. We kno
    9·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!