Two landmark decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court served to confirm the inferred constitutional authority for judicial review in the United States: In 1796, Hylton v. United States was the first case decided by the Supreme Court involving a direct challenge to the constitutionality of an act of Congress, the Carriage Act of 1794 which imposed a "carriage tax".[2]
The Court engaged in the process of judicial review by examining the
plaintiff's claim that the carriage tax was unconstitutional. After
review, the Supreme Court decided the Carriage Act was not
unconstitutional. In 1803, Marbury v. Madison[3]
was the first Supreme Court case where the Court asserted its authority
for judicial review to strike down a law as unconstitutional. At the
end of his opinion in this decision,[4]
Chief Justice John Marshall maintained that the Supreme Court's
responsibility to overturn unconstitutional legislation was a necessary
consequence of their sworn oath of office to uphold the Constitution as
instructed in Article Six of the Constitution.
Answer:
According to the tenth amendment, the state has:
B. The powers not prohibited by the constitution to the states and
D. The powers that the people want
Explanation:
The amendment says that the powers not delegated to the States and nor prohibited to them by it (the amendment) are reserved to the States. Then, they can have a power that has not been prohibited and they can have the power that people want.
a European intellectual movement of the late 17th and 18th centuries emphasizing reason and individualism rather than tradition. It was heavily influenced by 17th-century philosophers such as Descartes, Locke, and Newton, and its prominent exponents include Kant, Goethe, Voltaire, Rousseau, and Adam Smith.
The Supreme Court overturn the conviction of Ernesto Miranda in 1966 because the police had failed to first inform Miranda of his right to an attorney and against self-incrimination.
<h3>What was the conviction of
Ernesto Miranda?</h3>
The case was related to Miranda who was found guilty of kidnapping and ra-pe and was sentenced to 20-30 years imprisonment on each count.
After the appeal of the case, the Supreme Court of Arizona held that Miranda's constitutional rights were not violated in obtaining the confession, hence, it overturn the conviction of Ernesto Miranda in 1966 because the police had failed to first inform Miranda of his right to an attorney and against self-incrimination.
Read more about Ernesto Miranda
brainly.com/question/2039279
#SPJ1
<span>Cliff will ignore all other needs until he satisfies his most basic needs for food and shelter. According to maslow, humans will have the tendency to fulfilled what we placed higher in the hierarchy of needs first (the one that bring the most satisfaction, in cliff's case, food and shelter) before we could move to the needs on the lower hierarchy. (such as luxury goods)</span>
