Answer:
A
Explanation:
Cause its right and im smart
Answer:
The correct answer is A. As a result of 20th century Supreme Court rulings, symbolic political speech gained substantial protections from government regulations.
Explanation:
Symbolic speech is a term that describes communicative situations in which the message transmitted is not literally expressed by the interlocutor. This type of speech is covered by the First Amendment implicitly.
Rulings such as Tinker v. Des Moines, United States v. O'Brien, Texas v. Johnson, and Cohen v. California expanded the protection of this type of discourse, including it within the protections of the First Amendment to freedom of expression.
For example, in the case Texas v. Johnson, it was established that the burning of an American flag involved a case of symbolic speech, so it should not be subject to prohibition by any type of law.
Answer:
Negative.
Explanation:
I am biasing of the impact from the point of view of people who were not Mongols. One of the main reasons its negative was the destruction and pillaging they caused, Mongols killed, looted, and other heinous actions to people who didn't want to be under Mongolian Rule. Places like Baghdad, which a Golden Age of Islam was happening, was destroyed and became a barren land because the Mongols sieged it and destroyed its irrigation system, The Mongols also burned crops, diverted rivers and catapulted diseased corpses into cities in order to starve or infect people with deadly diseases. Some historians believe that the use of dead bodies by the Mongols is what brought the Black Death to Europe.
