The answer you're looking for is B. are much longer, as state constitutions most be far more specific than the broader US constitution, as they outline in detail how a state should be run. State constitutions can be amended, do provide a legislature, and most do have a bill of rights.
The two arguments that resulted in the Electrol College Compromise are that the members of the congress should choose the president and the citizens should vote for the president.
<u>Explanation:</u>
The electrol college compromise is the group of members who are selected by the state legislature to choose the President or the Vice- president. It is a process by which the President is choosen by the members.
The two arguments that resulted in it's formation are that the members should choose and the people should vote for the President.
All of the given choices are correct. The British Parliament, though favoring the arrival of William and Mary, did not wish their reappearance under the laws of the absolute monarchy. A file called the Declaration of Rights was delivered to the king and queen before they were given the throne in 1689. That year, Parliament formalized the document naming it as the English Bill of Rights. It asserted the following:
Parliament would choose who ruled the country.
The ruler would be subject to parliamentary laws and could not announce or suspend any law.
The ruler could not enforce taxes or uphold an army in peacetime without Parliament's consent.
Parliament would meet often, and the ruler could not obstruct with the election of its members.
The Bill of Rights assured free speech for members of Parliament.
It also secure private citizens. Any citizen could request the government for reprieve of injustice. No citizen could be involuntary to pay unfairly high bail or face cruel or unusual sentence.
They would have a congregation, community of worshippers the made its own rules and elected it own leader.
Once people began to govern their churches, they also wanted political power.
Time
passed and the congregations increased.They began to to affect other
peoples lives, but it didnt replace the national government.
Finally the national rulers shared some power with the local government
...
Which is called FEDERALISM
Answer:
<em>Hello, medieval cities did not have developed urban infrastructure, instead it was all built based on whomever found best spot for a building. Since the city needed the walls to be safe it meant that free space was sacrificed in order for people to be safe in a small urban area. Medieval Towns. Most people in Medieval England were village peasants but religious centres did attract people and many developed into towns or cities. Outside of London, the largest towns in England were the cathedral cities of Lincoln, Canterbury, Chichester, York, Bath, Hereford etc. Hope That Helps!</em>
