Answer:
The Kelo case proved to be a revelation for many New Londoners about their property rights. Small business owners like me have to be especially careful to avoid falling under the radar of government development projects.
Until now, I was under the impression that eminent domain gave the government the right to take private property as long as it was for public use. My assumption included that public use defined anything that the public could literally use. Apparently, the court went with a broader interpretation of public use under which “a taking is constitutional if it serves a public purpose” (Kelo v. City of New London).
This interpretation means public use includes anything that is deemed as fit for public purpose, even though I or most citizens may not be able to directly use it. This raises the concern of what all could fall under public use. I trust that the government won’t go on seizing private properties for its unrestrained use. However, the Kelo case still proves to be a matter of concern for me.
Although the Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution provides a certain safeguard, the wider interpretation of public use makes it easier for businesses like mine to lose ownership of their property to the government.
Explanation:
The best and most correct answer among the choices provided by the question is the fourth choice which is all of the above.
The use of fossil fuels makes the US vulnerable because it is an exporter of the fuel, and also it imports its petroleum from foreign countries most especially the Middle East.
I hope my answer has come to your help. God bless and have a nice day ahead!
True, Wilderness was recognized as a moral and cultural resource and a basis for national self-esteem by the middle decades of the nineteenth century. Below you can learn more about Wilderness Appreciation.
<h3>What is Wilderness Appreciation?</h3>
The term wilderness appreciation began in the cities with wealthy and educated men who wrote about wilderness. These literati laid the intellectual foundation for a reversal of wilderness antipathy.
The appreciation of wilderness was in contrast to the earlier motives spread by Romanticism about Wilderness. The term wilderness became less repulsive because they were given a new intellectual context in which its traits were now a positive attribute. The wilderness itself had not changed, it was still considered solitary, mysterious, and chaotic.
Learn more about Wilderness at brainly.com/question/15726486
#SPJ1
Explanation:
Causes-
• European desire for new trade routes
• Growing power and wealth of European nations
• Competition for trade
• Missionaries' desire to convert others to Christianity
Effects-
• Knowledge grows about other religions
• European and Native Americans clash
• Enslavement of Africans
• Rivalry in The Americas grow
•Paragraph
The Europeans wanted new trade routes, competition, and growing wealth because of that the Africans were enslaved and rivalry happened throughout the Americas. Not only that but the Europeans wanted to convert others to Christianity, therefore, spreading knowledge about other religions.
I would say <span>right to change/abolish government. It is our rights as citizens to better our government or to abolish government in effort to start over, but I think the safe choice is equality.</span><span />
