I'm pretty sure the answer is yes.
What the three cases have in common is that they were all victories for the people and their amendment guaranteed rights against states who wanted to obstruct those. The first case was about preventing states from limiting freedom of speech, the second was about preventing illegally obtained evidence from being used in court, and the third was that the states have an obligation to provide a lawyer to criminals if they can't pay for them.
Answer:
They were forced to move out from their ancestral land.
Explanation:
The American-Indian war occurred because the government of the settlers wanted to take ownership over the resources that resided Within the Native's ancestral land.
Since the land was tied to their ancestral history and cultural origin, the Native refuse to give it. So, both parties engaged in the battle.
The technological advancement that's possessed by the settlers made the tide of war turn in their favor. As a result, the native Americans were forcefully removed from their home and scattered all across North America.
Answer:
Explanation:
A surplus describes the amount of an asset or resource that exceeds the portion that's actively utilized. A surplus can refer to a host of different items, including income, profits, capital, and goods. In the context of inventories, a surplus describes products that remain sitting on store shelves, unpurchased. In budgetary contexts, a surplus occurs when income earned exceeds expenses paid. A budget surplus can also occur within governments when there's leftover tax revenue after all governmental programs are fully financed.
