The American colonists protest against the tea act of 1773 by dumping shipments of tea into the harbor.
The tea tax infuriated the colonists in America. They thought the Tea Act was a ploy to get colonial support for the already-enacted tariff. The British East India Company's agents sold tea directly to the American colonies, which hurt colonial merchants' profits.
That's why Tea Act reignited the colonists' hostility to the tax on tea, which they had never acknowledged as constitutional. On December 16, 1773, colonists boarded East India Company ships and threw the tea they were carrying overboard as a sign of their continued protest.
To learn more about tea act of 1773 here
brainly.com/question/12171439
#SPJ4
Hmmm, try:
C
<em>It is clearly named in the amendment forbidding search and seizure. -best explains the legal basis for the right to privacy.</em>
<em />
If the states are the judges of whether a law is constitutional then what does the supreme court really do. I'm not saying that the citizens shouldn't have a say. It's just that is what the the supreme court does they make the final decision. Either way whether the state or the supreme court comes to a decision someone is going to make a decision. The disadvantage is that the states would be taking away the whole purpose of the supreme court. I guess I can say that a advantage is that as a person you feel as if your having some sort of say in how your state laws are being judged.
-p.s sorry is this didn't help I'm trying:(
