Answer:
Cosummate
Explanation:
Consummate love: In psychology, the term consummate love was described by one of the famous psychologist named Robert Sternberg in his theory of love based on three distinct scales including commitment, intimacy, and passion.
Consummate love is defined as consisting of all three distinct scale or components and is considered as a complete form of love that represents an ideal form of relationship. In this category of love, two different persons involve in sexual relationships for so many years being in a relationship and often feel that they can not see themselves with any other person and therefore strive towards each other.
Answer:
A main purpose of the president’s State of the Union address is to identify major policy issues.
Explanation:
The formal basis for the State of the Union Address is from the U.S. Constitution: The constitutionally mandated presidential message has gone through a few name changes:
t began to be informally called the "state of the Union" message/address from 1942 to 1946.
Since 1947 it has officially been known as the State of the Union Address.
Answer:
Re chief was a leaders of war and a white chief served on a councilto help make decisions for the broble
Explanation:
They led power over their families ",participatedin government , and fought in wars
Answer:
a. The Equal Protection Clause is a clause from the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The clause provides that "nor shall any State [...] deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws".
Its purpose is to apply substantially more constitutional restrictions against the states than had applied before the Civil War. Hence, in Shaw v. Reno, 509 U.S. 630 (1993), Supreme Court held that redistricting based on race must be held to a standard of strict scrutiny under the equal protection clause while bodies doing redistricting must be conscious of race to the extent that they must ensure compliance with the Voting Rights Act.
While in the case of Easley v. Cromartie, 532 U.S. 234 (2001), Supreme Court held that the State violated the Equal Protection Clause in drawing the 1997 boundaries was based on clearly erroneous findings.
b. In the case of Easley v. Cromartie, an appeal from the decision given in hunt v. Cromartie was filed in the supreme court of the United States by Easley. In hunt v. Cromartie, the court held that the legislature of North Carolina did not use the factor of race while drawing the boundaries in the twelfth congressional district,1992. It was held by the court that the legislature did not violate the equal protection clause of the constitution and no evidence to prove that legislature set its boundaries on a racial basis rather than a political basis.
In Easley v Cromartie the appeal was that drawing the boundaries for voting violated the equal protection clause of the constitution. The supreme court of the United States held that the decision of the district court is erroneous because it actually relied upon racial factors and this is not in the interest of the state.
In Shaw v. Reno the court concluded that the plan of North Carolina tried to segregate the voters on the basis of race.
