1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
BlackZzzverrR [31]
4 years ago
11

Which First Lady save the portraits of Washington and his wife during the war of 1812?

History
2 answers:
FrozenT [24]4 years ago
5 0

Answer:

Dolley Madison

Explanation:

she save the portraits from being looted

Hope this helps

Victoria Howell

Natalija [7]4 years ago
4 0

Dolley Madison saved the portraits of President Washington and his wife

You might be interested in
What crime was Socrates tried and executed for in 399 B.C.E.?
olasank [31]
CORRUPTING THE YOUTH OF ATHENS.
3 0
3 years ago
Why was the Western Russia migration (1800s-1980s) so important? Were there any lasting consequences?
VladimirAG [237]

Answer:

  • The collapse of the communist regimes in Eastern Europe brought widespread fear of a <u>'tidal wave'</u> of immigrants from the East into Western Europe. Quite apart from the social and political importance, East-West migration also poses a challenge to established theories of migration, as in most cases the migrant flow cannot be categorised as either refugee movement or a labour migration.
  • Indeed much of the trans-border movement is not officially recognised, as many migrants are temporary, commuting, <u>'tourists' </u>or illegal, and remain invisible to the authorities. This book focuses on Russian migration into Western Europe following the breakup of the Soviet Union. Helen Kopnina explores the concept of 'community' through an examination of the lives of Russian migrants in two major European cities, London and Amsterdam.
  • In both cases Kopnina finds an <u>'invisible community',</u> inadequately defined in existing literature. Arguing that Russian migrants are highly diverse, both socially and in terms of their views and adaptation strategies, Kopnina uncovers a community divided by mutual antagonisms, prompting many to reject the idea of belonging to a community at all.
  • Based on extensive interviews, this fascinating and unique ethnographic account of the <u>'new migration'</u> challenges the underlying assumptions of traditional migration studies and post-modern theories. It provides a powerful critique for the study of new migrant groups in Western Europe and the wider process of European identity formation.

7 0
3 years ago
What happened when Lee Yick appealed his conviction for running an illegal laundry in San Francisco to the U.S. Supreme Court?
Norma-Jean [14]
C. The Supreme Court decided that authorities had unfairly singled him out because of his race. This was because Lee Yick had worked in a laundromat for twenty years and it was illegal at the time that laundromats were to be built in wooden rooms. However, ninety-five percent of laundromats were in wooden complexes and only some of them were Chinese-owned, while others were owned by other races. However, Lee Yick was singled out and the Supreme Court ruled that although the law said it was race-blind, it in fact was judging him based on his race.
6 0
3 years ago
2. Were there difference in Americans responses to the Supreme Court decisions
Sedbober [7]

Answer:No

In Cooper v. Aaron (1958), the Supreme Court ruled that the state of Arkansas could not pass legislation undermining the Court's ruling in Brown v. Board of Education (1954) that racial segregation in public schools is unconstitutional.

Georgia, 31 U.S. 515 (1832), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Cherokee Nation was sovereign. According to the decision rendered by Chief Justice John Marshall, this meant that Georgia had no rights to enforce state laws in its territory.

Cherokee Nations v. Georgia, 30 U.S. (5 Pet.) 1 (1831), was a United States Supreme Court case. The Cherokee Nation sought a federal injunction against laws passed by the U.S. state of Georgia depriving them of rights within its boundaries, but the Supreme Court did not hear the case on its merits. It ruled that it had no original jurisdiction in the matter, as the Cherokees were a dependent nation, with a relationship to the United States like that of a "ward to its guardian," as said by Justice Marshall.

Explanation:

In June 1830, a delegation of Cherokee led by Chief John Ross (selected at the urging of Senators Daniel Webster and Theodore Frelinghuysen) and William Wirt, attorney general in the Monroe and Adams administrations, were selected to defend Cherokee rights before the U.S. Supreme Court. The Cherokee Nation asked for an injunction, claiming that Georgia's state legislation had created laws that "go directly to annihilate the Cherokees as a political society." Georgia pushed hard to bring evidence that the Cherokee Nation couldn't sue as a "foreign" nation due to the fact that they did not have a constitution or a strong central government. Wirt argued that "the Cherokee Nation [was] a foreign nation in the sense of our constitution and law" and was not subject to Georgia's jurisdiction. Wirt asked the Supreme Court to void all Georgia laws extended over Cherokee lands on the grounds that they violated the U.S. Constitution, United States-Cherokee treaties, and United States intercourse laws.

The Court did hear the case but declined to rule on the merits. The Court determined that the framers of the Constitution did not really consider the Indian Tribes as foreign nations but more as "domestic dependent nation[s]" and consequently the Cherokee Nation lacked the standing to sue as a "foreign" nation. Chief Justice Marshall said; "The court has bestowed its best attention on this question, and, after mature deliberation, the majority is of the opinion that an Indian tribe or nation within the United States is not a foreign state in the sense of the constitution, and cannot maintain an action in the courts of the United States." The Court held open the possibility that it yet might rule in favor of the Cherokee "in a proper case with proper parties".

Chief Justice John Marshall wrote that "the relationship of the tribes to the United States resembles that of a 'ward to its guardian'." Justice William Johnson added that the "rules of nations" would regard "Indian tribes" as "nothing more than wandering hordes, held together only by ties of blood and habit, and having neither rules nor government beyond what is required in a savage state."

Justice Smith Thompson, in a dissenting judgment joined by Justice Joseph Story, held that the Cherokee nation was a "foreign state" in the sense that the Cherokee retained their "usages and customs and self-government" and the United States government had treated them as "competent to make a treaty or contract". The Court therefore had jurisdiction; Acts passed by the State of Georgia were "repugnant to the treaties with the Cherokees" and directly in violation of a congressional Act of 1802; and the injury to the Cherokee was severe enough to justify an injunction against the further execution of the state laws.[

6 0
3 years ago
What was the period that immediately preceded the ars nova called?
Leona [35]
The correct answer is
<span>the ars antiqua

Basically, it's fancy terms for old and new. Antiqua is from antique and antiquity and means old, and it precedes the ars nova which means new. Basically, both mean new art and old art, in relation to time. Both are old art now since the ars nova period was in the middle ages.</span>
6 0
4 years ago
Other questions:
  • What natural resources kick started the industrial revolution in england
    13·1 answer
  • How did the soviet union and its Satellite states react to the Marshall Plan? How might their reaction have influenced the devel
    14·1 answer
  • What is the slogan of the KKK
    7·2 answers
  • Why might France have been more motivated to resist independence movement in Algeria then it had in French Indo-china?
    15·2 answers
  • In what ways did Americans respond to shortages?
    5·1 answer
  • Which of the following was a reason that the US Senate refused to let the United States join the League of Nations?
    7·2 answers
  • What happened in the 1740’s in the middle colonies
    15·1 answer
  • SOMEONE HELP PLZZZZZ‼️‼️‼️‼️
    5·1 answer
  • Is this statement true or false? Theodore Roosevelt’s Progressive party appealed to some Republicans and others who wanted chang
    6·2 answers
  • Which is true about all liquids
    14·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!