The answer is: People surrender some of their natural rights in exchange for the common good
Both Rousseau and Locke theorized about the Social contract which is a type of agreement between the people and the legitimate powers of authority that results in the formation of a<u> state or an organized society</u>, the prime motive being the desire for protection, and in order to achieve this common good they had to be willing to forfeit some of their rights and impose the same duties on all.
What is the question you need help with??
The Supreme Court was affirming the point that states (not the federal government) should be in charge of the voting procedures in their states.The Supreme Court decision you're referring to, which invalidated pre-clearance conditions, was Shelby County v. Holder (2013). "Pre-clearance" meant that certain states, according to the Voting Rights Acts of 1965, had to get approval in advance from federal authorities for any changes they made to their state regulations regarding voting. That standard had been applied to several states because they had displayed discriminatory practice in their voting laws. The decision in Shelby County v. Holder held that the federal government could not keep applying that requirement on the basis of decades-old data.
I recently posted another answer on Shelby County v. Holder, which you can check out too. Read more on Brainly.com -
brainly.com/question/9069264#readmore
It is A. Included workers from different industries
Answer:
tundra and desert
Explanation:
Grass = a good chance there is some sort of rainfall
every option has grass except the tundra and desert
experience tells us the tundra is quite literally too cold to have precipitation fall from it and the desert is too hot
