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
Vadim26 [7]
2 years ago
7

what Massachusetts Minister was banished because of his belief in the separation of church and state?

History
1 answer:
olga_2 [115]2 years ago
6 0
<span>Roger Williams was the Minister banished because of his beliefs

</span>
You might be interested in
Most immigrants were drawn to Texas in the mid-nineteenth century because of
RideAnS [48]
In South America, there are many corrupt governments and violent gangs. The governments were put there by the Soviets or Americans. It was the Cold War (which was about influence) and so they put many governments in charge. This lead to mass immigration to the U.S were life was easier and Texas just so happened to have the largest border with Mexico than any other state.
4 0
3 years ago
The Pilgrims first dropped anchor in Cape Cod Bay true or false
castortr0y [4]

Answer:

True

Explanation:

They landed at Cape Cod and the Strangers and the Pilgrims were in a disagreement because the Strangers were supposed to land at the Hudson Bay, but William Bradford  (the future governer) saved them from a slaughter by creating the Mayflower Contract.

5 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
What did delegates for a strong national government believe?
avanturin [10]

Answer:

The delegates for a strong national government believed that a strong national government would endanger the rights of states. The delegates for stronger state governments believed that a strong national government would threaten individual liberty.

Explanation:

Hope it helps:)

brainlest plzz

4 0
2 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Define hunter gathers
laiz [17]

Answer:

a member of a nomadic people who live chiefly by hunting and fishing, and harvesting wild food.

Explanation:

7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
10 POINTS
netineya [11]

Answer:

Judicial review is the power of the courts to declare that acts of the other branches of government are unconstitutional, and thus unenforceable. For example if Congress were to pass a law banning newspapers from printing information about certain political matters, courts would have the authority to rule that this law violates the First Amendment, and is therefore unconstitutional. State courts also have the power to strike down their own state’s laws based on the state or federal constitutions.

Today, we take judicial review for granted. In fact, it is one of the main characteristics of government in the United States. On an almost daily basis, court decisions come down from around the country striking down state and federal rules as being unconstitutional. Some of the topics of these laws in recent times include same sex marriage bans, voter identification laws, gun restrictions, government surveillance programs and restrictions on abortion.

Other countries have also gotten in on the concept of judicial review. A Romanian court recently ruled that a law granting immunity to lawmakers and banning certain types of speech against public officials was unconstitutional. Greek courts have ruled that certain wage cuts for public employees are unconstitutional. The legal system of the European Union specifically gives the Court of Justice of the European Union the power of judicial review. The power of judicial review is also afforded to the courts of Canada, Japan, India and other countries. Clearly, the world trend is in favor of giving courts the power to review the acts of the other branches of government.

However, it was not always so. In fact, the idea that the courts have the power to strike down laws duly passed by the legislature is not much older than is the United States. In the civil law system, judges are seen as those who apply the law, with no power to create (or destroy) legal principles. In the (British) common law system, on which American law is based, judges are seen as sources of law, capable of creating new legal principles, and also capable of rejecting legal principles that are no longer valid. However, as Britain has no Constitution, the principle that a court could strike down a law as being unconstitutional was not relevant in Britain. Moreover, even to this day, Britain has an attachment to the idea of legislative supremacy. Therefore, judges in the United Kingdom do not have the power to strike down legislation.

Explanation:

nationalparalegal.edu /JudicialReview.aspx

6 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Did the really wampanoag brought popcorn to the first thanksgiving feast
    5·1 answer
  • What was NOT associated with the 'New Immigrants' who came to the United States after the Civil War?
    7·1 answer
  • Determine if the statement is true or false.
    6·1 answer
  • |
    8·2 answers
  • How did Great Britain offer to help the US stop other European nations from establishing colonies in the Americas in the early 1
    13·1 answer
  • Susan Solomon hypothesized that ClO levels would be increased if ozone depletion came about because of CFCs. Her team found elev
    6·1 answer
  • Who created the Freedmen's Bureau in the 1860s?
    15·2 answers
  • Quick little questions: What can you find Outside the nucleus?
    12·1 answer
  • Anybody have discord and wanna talk abt haikyuu?? plsssss i need more people to talk with ! &lt;33
    6·2 answers
  • Match the events that took place to their causes rooted in the Articles of Confederation. Mount Vernon Conference Shays' Rebelli
    11·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!