Answer: I think drugs:/
Explanation:
1909, the federal government brought charges against the country’s best known soft-drink manufacturer, charging it with false advertising and for quietly loading its bottles with a risky stimulant. The case — named for a seizure of specially prepared syrup — was formally titled United States vs. Forty Barrels and Twenty Kegs of Coca Cola.
Two years later, in the spring of 1911, the trial commenced in Chattanooga, Tenn. Many had expected its focus to be on the illegal drug cocaine, which in the 19th century had been a celebrated part of the company’s formula, highlighted in its famously pep-you-up advertising schemes.
Answer:
The generality of Article III of the Constitution raised questions that Congress had to address in the Judiciary Act of 1789. These questions had no easy answers, and the solutions to them were achieved politically. The First Congress decided that it could regulate the jurisdiction of all Federal courts, and in the Judiciary Act of 1789, Congress established with great particularity a limited jurisdiction for the district and circuit courts, gave the Supreme Court the original jurisdiction provided for in the Constitution, and granted the Court appellate jurisdiction in cases from the Federal circuit courts and from the state courts where those courts rulings had rejected Federal claims. The decision to grant Federal courts a jurisdiction more restrictive than that allowed by the Constitution represented a recognition by the Congress that the people of the United States would not find a full-blown Federal court system palatable at that time.
For nearly all of the next century the judicial system remained essentially as established by the Judiciary Act of 1789. Only after the country had expanded across a continent and had been torn apart by civil war were major changes made. A separate tier of appellate circuit courts created in 1891 removed the burden of circuit riding from the shoulders of the Supreme Court justices, but otherwise left intact the judicial structure.
Explanation:
i hope this helps
Answer:
D
Explanation:
It led to active foreign policy involvement in Afghanistan.
king charles went to parliament and tried to arrest members who opposed his policies
Explanation:
<em>The three outcomes United States expected from the Trans-Pacific Partnership were: </em>
- Helping protect human rights in the workplace
- Giving Asia Pacific producers access to a bigger market
- Boosting the export of American products in Asia-Pacific nations.
The Trans-Pacific Partnership is a free-trade agreement between <em>Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, Vietnam, and United States</em> that concluded negotiations on October 2015.
<em>The TTP included much more than reducing trade barriers, tariffs and quotas</em>, it required countries to lengthen the term of copyright protection, stricter rules for labor and environment, provide stronger protection to pharmaceutical companies and give new countries' laws and regulations to foreign investors.
It is a controversial trade due to all its regulations, President Donald Trump withdrew the United States from the agreement on 2017.
