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
Georgia [21]
3 years ago
9

The Founding Fathers wanted to ensure that no one faction of the population could choose the president. How does the Supreme Cou

rt in the 2000 election challenge this original intent? because the Supreme Court could be considered a faction because the Supreme Court did not vote fairly because the Supreme Court had its own agenda because the Supreme Court cannot involve itself in matters of elections
History
1 answer:
Phoenix [80]3 years ago
6 0

Answer:

The Supreme Court decision that decided the 2000 Presidential Election should go down in history as one of the court's most ill-conceived judgments.  In issuing its poorly-reasoned ruling in Bush v. Gore, the court majority unnecessarily exposed itself to charges of partisanship and risked undermining the court's stature as an independent, impartial arbiter of the law.  Although the court majority correctly identified constitutional problems in the specific recount proceedings ordered by the Florida Supreme Court, the decision to end all recount attempts did immeasurable damage to the equal protection rights the court claimed to be guarding, since it favored a convenient and timely tabulation of ballots over an accurate recording of the vote.  In the controversy that followed this decision, some critics of the majority decision argued that the court had no business taking on Bush v. Gore in the first place, that it should have remained solely within the Florida courts (Ginsburg, J. [Dissent] Bush v. Gore [2000]).  This paper will argue that the court was correct to intervene but that  umm the resulting decision was flawed and inconsistent, with potentially serious, adverse implications for the Federal judiciary if the court continues to issue rulings in this way.

Explanation:

You might be interested in
Which argument would have been used to justify increased government influence over American society during World War II?
zepelin [54]
The correct answer is <span>A. Government intervention is needed to guarantee that Americans will support the war. 

They faced similar problems like they did in world war one. The citizens thought a lot about being isolated and didn't want meddling in European affairs, while they also had many people of different ethnicity who felt differently about the war. The country needed to interfere to get support for participation in the war and they did get it eventually.</span>
5 0
3 years ago
Which of the following scenarios would be permitted under the First Amendment and not violate any of its clauses?
Ganezh [65]

Answer:

All of them are correct, since you an only pick one, you can pick any.

5 0
2 years ago
How did democracy in greece end
Anika [276]
The Final End of Athenian Democracy. A year after their defeat of Athens in 404 BC, the Spartans allowed the Athenians to replace the government of the Thirty Tyrants with a new democracy. Only a decade later Sparta had been reduced to a shadow of its former self. But Thebes' dominance of Greece would be short-lived.
8 0
3 years ago
identify the statements that describe the ideas adam smith expressed in the wealth of nations, published in 1776.
AlladinOne [14]

The statements that describe the ideas that Adam Smith expressed in the wealth of nations are:

  • The invisible hand.
  • The natural laws of supply and demand

The invisible hand theory is a principle that Adam proposed that Individuals in a society should be left to act in their own best interests because the society would gain from it in the long run.

The natural laws of demand and supply is a function of the invisible hand which is automatically responsible for prices and market distributions in the economy

Read more on brainly.com/question/16039108?referrer=searchResults

8 0
2 years ago
Which of the following Enlightenment thinkers was exiled from his home country for being too outspoken against the nobility of t
wel
Thomas Hobbes was exiled from is home country and remained there for 11 years.
5 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • A scientific law idk plzz help me
    15·2 answers
  • Why did colonists resent the Townshend acts?
    10·2 answers
  • What’s the goal MLK speech
    6·1 answer
  • What do the ideas of reincarnation and karma have in common?
    14·1 answer
  • What were the effects of the Federal Highway Act? Check all that apply.
    15·1 answer
  • What was a result of the conquest of Constantinople?
    15·1 answer
  • What was Sherman's objective in capturing Atlanta?
    12·1 answer
  • Which king is more powerful in the world ? ​
    5·1 answer
  • 13. Jason is collecting rainwater in buckets.
    14·1 answer
  • The main concern of the Anti-federalist was what?
    12·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!