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:
Social Progressives believe the redistribution of wealth will help the lower class achieve a higher standard of living.
Explanation:
Social progressivism is based on the idea that human development are as a result of science and technology, economy and the social reforms. They are of the belief that economic inequality between the lower class and higher class and the conflicts between workers and capitalist makes a society not to progress. These social movement is of the belief that the people can make a change instead of always waiting for the government.
Social Progressives believe the redistribution of wealth will help the lower class achieve a higher standard of living.
Answer:
European
Explanation:
In the Arab world, enslaved people were often European. Roughly 1 million and 1.25 million Europeans were captured between the 16th and 19th centuries by Barbary corsairs and sold as slaves.
It can be deduced that the central idea that's in the text is C. Refusing to address an issue is not the same thing as curing it.
The central idea in a text simply means the main idea that's in the text. It's simply what the author wants the readers or the audience to know.
From the complete question, the central idea that's in the text is that refusing to address an issue is not the same thing as curing it. The author stated that when there are differences, people should address them rather than overlooking them.
Learn more about central ideas on:
brainly.com/question/13942462
The answer would be D. Respectful because Gandhi held peaceful protests, and King had a philosophy of nonviolent resistance.
Hope this helped :)
