Not only did they reject the idea of establishing a system of church courts, they also forbade ministers from holding public office.
Answer:
B) Judiciary Act of 1789.
Explanation:
John Marshall ruled on this case as the Chief Justice. He first answered that Marbury had a right to his job because it had been signed and approved. The actual delivery was a custom, not a requirement. He then ruled that a writ of mandamus (a type of court order) was the correct way for Marbury to rule. Finally, he noted that the Judiciary Act of 1789 allowed the Supreme Court to make this kind of ruling.
<em>The next question was who could decide this issue. Marshall ruled that the Supreme Court could decide it because the Judiciary Act of 1789 said that they could. However, Marshall said that a section of the Judiciary Act was unconstitutional. That section allowed the Supreme Court to make a writ but the United States Constitution did not. Therefore, that section was unconstitutional and the Supreme Court could not make a writ for Marbury.
</em>
Marshall looking over the Constitution and the statute is judicial review, a statement that the Supreme Court had an independent power to determine whether something was constitutional or not.
<span>A. relationships with the American Indians they encountered.</span>
It was started in asia and moved to Europe killing one-third of Europes population in the Fourteenth century
The term used to describe the process when both the federal and state governments work together to solve national problems would be "concurrent powers", which are what exist in most federal republics between the central government and the states.
