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 statement best explains the relationship between these two facts?
Inessa05 [86]

This question is a bit tricky, but I believe it is the answer on the bottom left. The other answers don't make quite as much sense as that one.

"Chocolate is a now sweet treat that is very popular in the United States."

It implies that chocolate wasn't always a sweet treat in the first section of the question, but if you pay close attention; it says that it "always hasn't been" a sweet treat, that use of word choice would mean it is now a sweet treat.

That's why I'd choose the one on the bottom left.

4 0
3 years ago
11. Which major economic development occurred
AysviL [449]
The best answer to go with is b
4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
In the monkeys paw what’s the third event to take place in the story
Elina [12.6K]

Answer:

Their son comes back but, it's to late.

Explanation:

Mr. White retrieves the paw from its place downstairs. Mrs. White orders him to make the wish two more times until he finally complies. He makes the wish, and as they wait, the candle goes out. They hear the clock, the creak of a stair, and the sound of a mouse. At last Mr. White goes downstairs. His match goes out, and before he can strike another, he hears a knock at the door. Another knock sounds, and Mr. White dashes upstairs. Mrs. White hears the third knock and says it’s Herbert. She realizes he hadn’t returned right after the wish had been made because he’d had to walk two miles from the graveyard to their house.

Mr. White begs her not to open the door, but she breaks free and runs downstairs. As she struggles to reach the bolt, the knocking becomes more insistent. Mr. White searches frantically for the paw, which had dropped to the floor. As Mrs. White pulls back the bolt, Mr. White finds the paw and makes a final wish. The knocking stops, and Mrs. White cries out. Mr. White dashes downstairs and sees that beyond the door, the street is empty.

7 0
3 years ago
The united states opposed mandated elections in vietnam in 1956 for what reason?
ikadub [295]
They opposed it, hypocritically, because they believed that H* Chi Minh (the communist leader of North Vietnam) would win over Ngo Dinh Diem (leader of South Vietnam) and that the country would be united with a communist leader and therefore communist government. the United States' policy of containment and the domino theory attributed to their intervention in cancelling the elections because they believed that if Vietnam became communist that other countries specifically those in Southeast Asia would follow. 
7 0
4 years ago
Work out 0.28*7.8*0.32/2.1*0.52​
jek_recluse [69]

Ur all wrong..............

4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • Why did the Kellogg Briand pact prove to be ineffective?
    15·1 answer
  • African slaves were brought to the English colonies to meet the demands for
    9·1 answer
  • What personal qualities in ronald reagan helped him to win election as president in 1980?
    14·1 answer
  • One of president george w bush slogans was
    11·2 answers
  • What is obtained from interviewing a friend or family mender about his or her life
    8·1 answer
  • What did Congress create in April 1935?
    12·1 answer
  • Please help me on this question if you would want brianleist!! Tank yah!! ^^
    13·2 answers
  • I need help with constitution project<br> please
    10·2 answers
  • Plz help!<br> How did the United States respond to Jewish refugees following Kristallnacht?
    6·1 answer
  • What was the main foreign
    7·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!