Paul, savings accounts have interest, so as time passes the value goes up.
The striations are caused by the regular arrangement of contractile proteins
Answer:
Option: Great Britain closed the port of Boston.
Explanation:
The Boston Tea Party was a protest against the taxes by the British. After winning the French and Indian War, the British were in debt. To lessen the burden of debt, they imposing acts on the colonist. The colonists grew angered as they forced to pay taxes. Along with taxes and the massacre in Boston led colonists to fight against the British. For revenge, the colonist dressed as Indians boarded the docked ship and dumped 342 chests of tea in water, which imported by the British East India company. British reacted to the Boston Tea Party by closing the port of Boston.
In March 1801, just two days before the end of his term as President, John Adams appointed a few dozen Federalist Party supporters to circuit judge and justice of the peace positions. It was an attempt to block and frustrate the plans of Thomas Jefferson as the new President, whose Democratic-Republican Party was against much of the centralization of power that the Federalists had stood for.
William Marbury had been appointed Justice of the Peace for the District of Columbia by outgoing president John Adams -- one of a number of such last-minute appointments made by Adams. When Thomas Jefferson came into office as president, he directed his Secretary of State, James Madison, not to deliver many of the commission papers for appointees such as Marbury. Marbury petitioned the Supreme Court directly to hear his case, as a provision of the Judiciary Act of 1789 had made possible. The Court said that particular provision of the Judiciary Act was in conflict with Article III of the Constitution, and so they could not issue a specific ruling in Marbury's case (which they believe he should have won). Nevertheless, in making their statement about the case, the Court established the principle of judicial review.
The power of judicial review is the Supreme Court's ability to strike down a law as unconstitutional.
In 1968 and 1980, the same liberal, educated and urban swaths of the country voiced similar fear and despair about the outcome — a sense that the nation as they knew it could not survive. And yet here we are, decades later, still enamored with the republic they were sure was doomed.
