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
strojnjashka [21]
3 years ago
14

Which of the following is true regarding the privileges and immunities clause of the U.S. Constitution?A. Under the clause, a st

ate cannot prohibit nonresidents from opening restaurants in the state.B. Under the clause, a state can allow state universities to charge higher tuition to out-of-state students because residents pay taxes that fund state universities, while out-of-state students do not.C. Under the clause, states may not discriminate against citizens of other states in the buying and selling of property.D. Under the clause, a state cannot prohibit nonresidents from opening restaurants in the state; a state can allow state universities to charge higher tuition to out-of-state students because residents pay taxes that fund state universities, while out-of-state students do not; and states may not discriminate against citizens of other states in the buying and selling of property.E. None of these. There is no privileges and immunities clause in the U.S. Constitution. The privileges and immunities clause is contained in a statute passed by Congress.
Law
1 answer:
Eduardwww [97]3 years ago
3 0

Answer:

C. Under the clause, states may not discriminate against citizens of other states in the buying and selling of property.

Explanation:

The Privileges and Immunities clause is found in Article IV of the United States Constitution and it prevents the states to treat in a discriminatory manner to citizens of other states. It also does not contain a market participation exception so, when the State acts as a supplier like in the case of selling or buying properties according to this clause it is forbidden to discriminate non-residents.

I hope this answer helps you.

You might be interested in
How do you impress a judge? How to get emancipated? What’s the process of emancipation? How to act responsible?
Ilia_Sergeevich [38]
To impress a judge we respectful and polite and be honest and truthful to yourself a judge can call a bluff, emancipation the fact or process of being set free from legal, social, or political restrictions; liberation.
3 0
3 years ago
DUE TODAY!!! PLEASE HELP!!!
saveliy_v [14]

Answer:

Retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor encouraged her staff to enjoy whitewater rafting, Mexican take-out brunch and tours of the Smithsonian. Justice Stephen Breyer loves to read French manuscripts and cultivated his distaste for footnotes during his clerkship to Arthur Goldberg. Such details were plentiful as Professor John Feerick introduced Justice O'Connor and her former colleague Justice Breyer to a well-heeled audience of lawyers and law students at Fordham Law School yesterday morning.

The two justices, and co-hosts of the day's symposium, sat together at a small table for their introductory panel, "Judicial Independence and Impartiality." Sandra Day O'Connor, dressed in a violet suit with gold buttons, her blonde hair now a shock of snowy white, frowned as she tried to twist the top off her water bottle, then leaned over towards Breyer and held it out to him. He wordlessly took it, unscrewed the top, and handed it back.

Sally Rider, Director of the William Rehnquist Center at the University of Arizona, kicked things off with a series of questions. Why, she asked O'Connor, did she decide to convene this conference on judicial independence in the first place?

O'Connor said she remembered seeing  "Impeach Earl Warren" signs in New Mexico and Arizona when she was growing up, and said that in her final years on the Supreme Court, attacks on judges increased, including proposals for mass impeachments of judges involved in the Terri Schiavo case, or proposals to cut judicial terms short, or a particularly disconcerting movement towards "Jail4Judges," a campaign to allow citizen panels to review rulings from the bench, with the ability to even imprison—as the name tantalizingly implies—those who made bad decisions. These developments were "very depressing," she said, and so she decided to use her retirement to call attention to these attacks on judges.

"An independent judiciary is an essential bedrock principle, and we're losing it."  The reason was in part the fact that civics and government are not a requirement for high school graduation. "One third of Americans can't name the three branches of government, but two thirds can name a judge on American Idol!"

Money has been pouring in to state judicial elections in recent years, including races for State Supreme Court justices. A 2004 campaign for a seat on the Illinois Supreme Court brought in a record-setting $9.3 million in political contributions, including hundreds of thousands of dollars from State Farm, a company with a case pending before the court. And just recently,  Wisconsin voters were subjected to over 11,000 televised campaign ads in the weeks before their state's Supreme Court race, over ninety percent of which were purchased by special interest groups (racking up a bill of well over 3.6 million dollars). Said O'Connor, "We put cash in the courtrooms, and it's just wrong." She then pointed to the room of lawyers and students. "You should take this seriously." (A later panel backed up O'Connor's concerns. New York Times legal correspondent Adam Liptak, Brennan Center attorney James Sample and Professor Michael Dimino discussed evidence that judges tend to rule in favor of their campaign contributors.)

She went on. "No other nation in the world elects judges." She pointed to Georgina Woods, the chief justice of Ghana, sitting in the front row, as if to illustrate her point.

"Why are we tolerating this? What are we going to do about it?" Then, seeming to remember that the initial question posed to her several minutes before was "why did you convene this conference," she added, "That's why," and sat back in her chair. The audience laughed and applauded.

Breyer took the floor next. Keeping state courts impartial is a major issue, but try talking about it with people "and they're asleep after five minutes." He recounted a trip to Russia he had made when serving as an appellate judge for the First Circuit after he was appointed by Carter. Meeting with Russian judges from across the country, he was surprised to hear their accounts of "telephone justice," when the party boss calls and tells judges which way to vote. "They asked me, ‘do you have telephone justice in the United States,' and I had to explain to them that no, the President wouldn't call you. He'd be crazy to do that."

Explanation:

7 0
2 years ago
3 things learners of economics should think about when it comes to the environment
Zielflug [23.3K]

Answer:

Hhgg

Explanation:

6 0
2 years ago
Read 2 more answers
The U.S. corrections system has become much harsher than other systems of a free society
Novay_Z [31]

Answer: true

Explanation:

5 0
2 years ago
Write about 2 times you may need to use public speaking concepts
zhannawk [14.2K]

Answer:

graduation speech and marriage

Explanation:

sorry if these aren't the examples you were looking for, I was thinking in the mind set that you would want examples everyone ends up doing at one point in there life.

4 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Political parties play a very important role for someone running for public office. What do you think are the three most importa
    10·2 answers
  • Which term describes a formal statement naming the plaintiff and the defendant and describing the nature of a civil lawsuit?
    6·2 answers
  • Before the 1970s, what EMS service was provided to the nation?
    7·1 answer
  • The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) possesses the authority to ________. investigate and reconcile whether a clai
    8·1 answer
  • What are the purposes of work release programs? Name two.
    5·1 answer
  • Which of the following is a federal law providing extended penalties for criminal acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal
    12·1 answer
  • Your friend wears ears buds while driving to school each day. Is this safe? Why or why not
    8·1 answer
  • Hows ur day??????????????????????????????????
    5·2 answers
  • O que influencia a moda adolescente
    14·1 answer
  • On January 1 to Matthew being paid 67,400 for sound equipment the band estimate it will use this equipment for five years and wi
    5·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!