A difference in a plant cell has a cell wall well an animal cell doesn’t
The main reason why we know more about Hammurabi's Code than other early forms of law is because Hammurabi's Code was the first (or at least one of the first) codes of law to be permanently inscribed on stone instead of issued on paper or through word of mouth.
Answer: The 89th Congress (1965–1967) passed a huge burst of domestic legislation that protected voting rights, promoted education, cared for the elderly, helped clean up the water and the air, promoted the arts and humanities, advanced automobile and highway safety, and extended a helping hand to the economically.
Explanation:
we do now. There will be many more requests for unanimous consent; like- wise there will be many more objections by individual Senators, for there will ... The Congress defined that role in the. Employment Act of 1946.
Answer: Appointing judges to the court.
Explanation: Firstly, enforcing a law doesn’t really limit the power of the judicial branch because they can simply strike down the law if it’s unconstitutional. Secondly, the President does not have the power to approve judicial nominations. That is only the Senate’s job. The President can appoint or nominate them, but the Senate is the one who approves.
Also, vetoing laws doesn’t limit the Judicial Branch’s power really in any way. Now, the correct answer is: Appointing judges / justices to the courts. This is because this power can not be limited at all by the judicial branch, only by congress. The Senate can deny the confirmation / appointment of a President’s appointee, and the Congress can also impeach that appointee later on for committed high crimes. The Judicial Branch can’t do any of that. The President can limit the Judiciary’s power by appointing judges that will go against any potential agenda of the Judicial Branch. For instance, if there happens to be liberal Supreme Court, whereas a majority of the members of the Supreme Court identify as liberal or were appointed by a Democratic President, a Republican President may want to nominate / appoint a conservative Justice or Justices to cancel out their majority and re-take the majority of the court. Honestly, this was a poorly worded question (not your fault at all, but the person who wrote it) because this doesn’t limit the power of the Judicial Branch in terms of its constitutional structure and powers, it merely limits and restricts the narrative or agenda of the members of the branch. Anyway, your answer is B: Appointing judges to the court.
The USA and GB did not seek to obtain new lands
