The correct cases and their results between Brown v. Board of Education and Plessy v. Ferguson were:
Brown v. Board of Education:
- Said segregation was NOT ALLOWED.
- This case OVERTURNED the precedent.
Plessy v. Ferguson:
- Coined the term "Separate but equal"
- Said that segregation (separation based on skin color) was ALLOWED.
<h3>How were Plessy v. Ferguson and Brown v. Board of Education different?</h3>
Plessy v. Ferguson was a case in the U.S. Supreme Court which affirmed that segregation based on skin color was allowed so long as both races were still treated equally.
Board of Education overturned the precedent and said that segregation by its very nature was not equal and so could not be allowed.
Find out more on Board of Education at brainly.com/question/15225232.
#SPJ1
In the years following the Civil War, railroads were privately owned and ... support of both major political parties and pressure groups from all regions of the country ... Labor unions formed or organizations that promoted the interests of workers ... In a monopoly, there is no competition and the seller can increase the price of ...
Explanation:
ya you ate right it is very confusing
Answer:
Senator Charles Sumner, an abolitionist leader before the Civil War and a powerful foe of conciliation toward states that had seceded after the war, considered his field to be "in morals, not politics." He is best remembered for surviving an attack by Representative Preston Brooks in 1856 during which Brooks beat Sumner with a cane on the Senate floor. Brooks' attack was a sign of the increasing hostility between the North and South in the years leading up to the Civil War.
1. It encourages international cooperation.
- true!
It
leads to peaceful resolutions of international
conflicts. - well, a bit, but only as an extension of the frist thing- so the frist one is a better option!
It protects fragile ecosystems. - nothing to do with that!
It provides jobs for workers
in developed nations. - not, rather in the developing nation
Which is an argument against free trade?
It can limit environmental protection measures. - i don't think this is a very good option, but its the best of those given. Let's say that one country prohibits production which is enviromentally harmful, but cheap: a free trade would challenge this deciosn.
It leads to
international conflict. - no, i don't think so
It increases the prices for many products. -no, it rather decreases
It
violates basic economic principles.
- no, i don't think si
