Answer:
attacked or assaulted property rights.
Explanation:
After the civil war, the supreme court held the idea that any government regulation (especially economic regulation) denied private businesses of their property rights and liberties, which constituted a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Fourteenth Amendment guaranteed equal and legal rights to all US citizens (businesses were included as citizens) and guaranteed that no government (state or federal) shall deny any citizen of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.
We have to remember that these were sensible times and the supreme court tried to protect the newly given rights specially to African Americans, but sometimes business people are very capable of using ideological trends in their favor.
Answer:
its B don't listen to stupid people
Explanation:
Answer: No, Paul has not breached a contract.
Explanation: To answer this, we must first we must define what a contract is.
A contract is an agreement between two or more people that is legally binding, and which guides or governs the actions or conducts of the parties involved.
A quality that makes a contract legally binding is that it is enforceable by law.
In the scenario given in the question above, Paul has not breached any contract because there isn't one. The promise to buy dinner has not been legally bound, therefore, it is not enforceable by law, in essence, it is not qualified to be called a contract.
This is true. Hope I could help!
