1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
In-s [12.5K]
4 years ago
11

According to White, with the Roe v. Wade decision, the Supreme Court has that

History
2 answers:
Verizon [17]4 years ago
5 0

Answer:

c

Explanation:

Tems11 [23]4 years ago
3 0

The correct answer is C) rewritten the states' existing abortion laws.

According to White, with the Roe v. Wade decision, the Supreme Court has rewritten the states' existing abortion laws.

We are talking about the Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade that was decided on January 22, 1973. The Court made its decision favoring Jane Roe. The members of the Court voted 7-2 and stated that when a woman was in the first trimester of her pregnancy, the government could not regulate the decision to abort. That responsibility relied on the hands of the mother and the medical doctor.

You might be interested in
During industrialization which led to an explosion of new economic theories
Kazeer [188]

what did was the new inventions off man which helped emproive

8 0
3 years ago
Who is the senate led by
Romashka [77]
He vice president of the united states
4 0
3 years ago
How did the arms race affect the US foreign policy<br><br> PLEASE HELP!!
Bond [772]

Answer:

I hope it helps u.

Explanation:

Arms races have generated a great deal of interest for a variety of reasons. They are widely believed to have significant consequences for states' security, but agreement stops there. In the debate over their consequences, one side holds that arms races increase the probability of war by undermining military stability and straining political relations. The opposing view holds that engaging in an arms race is often a state's best option for avoiding war when faced with an aggressive adversary. Debate over the causes of arms races is just as divided. One school believes that arms races are primarily rational responses to external threats and opportunities, whereas arms race skeptics believe that arms buildups are usually the product of a mixture of internal, domestic interests, including those of the scientists involved in research and development (R&D), the major producers of weapons systems, and the military services that will operate them. The policy implications of these contending views are equally contradictory; critics see arms control as a way to reduce the probability of war and rein in domestic interests that are distorting the state's security policy, and proponents argue that military competition is most likely to protect the state's international interests and preserve peace.

Arms buildups and arms races also play a prominent role in international relations (IR) theory. Building up arms is one of a state's three basic options for acquiring the military capabilities it requires to achieve its international goals; the other two are gaining allies and cooperating with its adversary to reduce threats. In broad terms, choosing between more competitive and more cooperative combinations of these options is among the most basic decisions a state must make, and it is often the most important.

Mark me as brainlist answer,

Have a nice day,

Thank you ☺

8 0
3 years ago
Who cut off Charleston from help and attacked the city in the spring of 1780?
kakasveta [241]

Answer:

British is the answer

Explanation:

8 0
2 years ago
Read 2 more answers
How are the governments of Jordan and Kuwait different from the governments of the United Arab Emirates and Oman
Afina-wow [57]

There's multiple differences in the government systems in the countries of Jordan and Kuwait on one side, and the United Arab Emirates and Oman on the other side.

Jordan and Kuwait are both countries that have parliamentary monarchies. They have a Prime Minister that is the head of the country, and also there's a multiparty system, so the people can vote for their leader.

The United Arab Emirates and Oman, on the other hand, are countries that have constitutional monarchies. The monarch is leading the country, and it is not the people that have their say in the choice by voting, instead, it is the only the high class representatives of the society that vote for who will lead the country.

7 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Which aspects of napoleon's education system did not change?
    5·2 answers
  • If people in court say, "I plead the fifth," that means they
    13·2 answers
  • What significant events Abraham Lincoln participated in
    12·1 answer
  • Manifest destiny was a US government policy true or false
    8·2 answers
  • 15+ Points!
    9·1 answer
  • During the Tang Dynasty were farmers able to develop new kinds of rice that grew well in poor soil
    15·1 answer
  • TIMED PLZ HURRY
    7·2 answers
  • How did the French Revolution affect American politics?
    8·1 answer
  • It is legal to block someone from voting because of their race or ethnicity true or false ?
    8·1 answer
  • What was the most important animal to the Woodland Native Americans?
    13·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!