Yes they did because they wanted African Americans to return to the land of their ancestors
Answer:
D.
Explanation:
Comparing the prices of the tickets to the Duke vs. UNC game to the price of tickets to the Super Bowl reinforces the idea that college sports are incredibly profitable.
Answer: increased inflation
Explanation:
Corporate personhood is the legal notion that a corporation, separately from its associated human beings (like owners, managers, or employees), has at least some of the legal rights and responsibilities enjoyed by natural persons (physical humans).[1] In the United States and most countries, corporations have a right to enter into contracts with other parties and to sue or be sued in court in the same way as natural persons or unincorporated associations of persons. In a U.S. historical context, the phrase 'Corporate Personhood' refers to the ongoing legal debate over the extent to which rights traditionally associated with natural persons should also be afforded to corporations. A headnote issued by the Court Reporter in the 1886 Supreme Court case Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Co. claimed to state the sense of the Court regarding the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as it applies to corporations, without the Court having actually made a decision or issued a written opinion on that point. This was the first time that the Supreme Court was reported to hold that the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause granted constitutional protections to corporations as well as to natural persons, although numerous other cases, since Dartmouth College v. Woodward in 1819, had recognized that corporations were entitled to some of the protections of the Constitution. In Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. (2014), the Court found that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 exempted Hobby Lobby from aspects of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act because those aspects placed a substantial burden on the closely held company's owners' exercise of free religion.[2]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood
Answer:
Edward the Confessor died on 5 January 1066. He had no children. Three men wanted to be king of England. Each man thought he had the best claim to the throne. The next king of England would have to win it in a war. Who do you think had the best claim to the throne?
Explanation:
Harold Godwinson, Earl of Wessex
Harold was a powerful and rich English nobleman. According to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, Edward named Godwinson as his successor on his deathbed. The next day, the royal council, known as the Witan, met and declared Godwinson king. An English king was proclaimed by the Witan - this gave Harold Godwinson the only claim to the throne by right.
William, Duke of Normandy
The Norman chroniclers reported that Edward had promised his distant relative, William, the throne in 1051. William was the only blood relative of Edward, but the English throne was not hereditary anyway. Claims that Edward promised the throne were probably made up by the rival sides after the event. The Bayeux Tapestry, which was made after the Conquest, shows Godwinson swearing an oath of support to William in a visit to Normandy in 1064. William was supported by the Pope.
Harald Hardrada, King of Norway, Viking warrior
Hardrada based his claim on the fact that his ancestor, King Cnut, had once ruled England (1016‒1035). He was helped by Godwinson's half-brother, Tostig.
