Answer:
d. Internal coherence demonstrates the rational relationship between parts of a hypothesis.
Explanation:
The<u> statement "d" best describes the internal coherence of a hypothesis </u>because if the different parts of a hypothesis aren't coherent with each other, aren't related, there's no internal coherence in the first place. All the different parts have to have a rational relationship, have to be rational with each other.
Answer:
It stopped states from preventing former slaves and poor people from voting.
Explanation:
The Twenty-fourth Amendment made it possible for all people to vote without prohibitions based on prejudices and intolerance. The biggest advance was that <u>no one could stop former slaves and poor people who could not pay taxes to vote.</u>
This Amendment stated that everyone had the same right when it comes to voting. As seen in the quote, the voting right is before any else and all citizens must have it.<u> This shall not be depended on any reasons, including not paying taxes. With this, </u><u>all people who could not for various reasons and circumstances, pay taxes properly beforehand, had the secured right of voting.</u>
The 2nd one: What social skills are built by playing sports.
Answer:
Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356, was the first case where the United States Supreme Court ruled that a law that is race-neutral on its face, but is administered in a prejudicial manner, is an infringement of the Equal Protection Clause in the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Explanation:
Answer:
Proof beyond a reasonable doubt
Explanation:
Proof beyond a reasonable doubt simply implies the provision of a proof that can be considered to be close to the real happening. Once a jury or judge is certain that Randy burned down the barn based on evidence, then it is enough to give a verdict. This provides the jury and judge the satisfaction beyond reasonable doubt that Randy burned down the barn.
