Answer:
Strictly speaking, Jefferson did not enact a reign of terror as happened in the French Revolution against the noble class. There were many controversies during the period that Jefferson was president and there were many who held different views than his.
Explanation:
The "reign of terror" is in reference to Jefferson's very public and vocal support of the French Revolution. The term "reign of terror" refers to the violence that was waged against elites and even the king and queen during the French Revolution. Jefferson was inspired by the principles of the revolution because he felt radical change was necessary to change the old monarchical regimes of Europe. The Federalists did not like this prospect because they wanted some continuity to the past -- they were in favor of a stronger central government and central bank and maintaining strong ties to England because of trade. Jefferson believed that the national government’s authority should be limited to just the powers expressly granted by the U.S. Constitution. More power should go to the states in the Democratic-Republican view.
Jefferson did not bring a reign of terror in the strict sense as America's revolution had already been won. But he was successful in championing the power of the individual states rather than a strong central government and the Federalists lost influence. Jefferson was also controversial in his persecution of his former vice president Aaron Burr and tensions with Chief Justice John Marshall who ruled there was no evidence of treason on the part of Burr despite the efforts Jefferson made to have him apprehended.
I do not know what you are asking soo here is the history of Oliver Hill:
Oliver Hill's sharp legal mind helped shred the segregation-era doctrine of “separate but equal.” He is best known for his role in Brown v. Board of Education, the landmark Supreme Court decision striking down segregated schools.Hill was a constant thorn in the side of hypocrisy, in the battle against segregation. His team of lawyers filed more civil rights suits in Virginia than the total filed in all other Southern states during the segregation era. At one point, the team had 75 cases pending. The Washington Post once estimated that Hill's team was responsible for winning more than $50 million in higher pay, new buses and better schools for black teachers and students. Threatening phone calls came to the Hill home so frequently in those days that Hill and his wife, Berensenia Walker, did not allow their son, Oliver Hill, Jr., to answer the telephone until he was a young man. Hatemongers burned a cross in the family's front yard. Hill persevered. Oliver W. Hill was born Oliver White in Richmond in 1907. His mother remarried and Hill took his stepfather's last name. The Hill family moved to Roanoke and then to Washington, D.C., where he graduated from Dunbar High School. Hill attended Howard University Law School with Thurgood Marshall, the The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) Legal Defense Fund's founder. They became fast friends. Extremely talented, bright and ambitious, they raced neck-and-neck toward excellence. When they graduated in 1933, Hill was second in the class to Marshall. Remaining good friends, Hill became a cooperating attorney with the Legal Defense Fund and joined Marshall in filing one of the five suits that won the Brown case, that ultimately dismantled legal segregation. Hill's early years as a lawyer were inauspicious. At one point he abandoned his practice and worked in Washington as a waiter. He later moved to Richmond, and began to practice there in 1939. He won his first civil rights case in 1940 in Norfolk. That decision ordered the school system to provide equal pay for black teachers. In April 1951, Hill and his partner, Spottswood W. Robinson III, received word that students at all-black R.R. Moton High School in Farmville had walked out of the leaky, poorly heated buildings that served as their school. Hill was one of the trial lawyers in the resulting desegregation lawsuit, Davis v. County School Board of Prince Edward County which would be decided under Brown v. the Board of Education. Hill's involvement in his community went beyond the courtroom. In 1948, he won a seat on the Richmond City Council, becoming the first African American elected to the City Council since Reconstruction Days. After the Brown decision, Hill worked briefly for the Federal Housing Administration, first as Assistant to the Federal Housing Commissioner in 1961 and later, as Federal Housing Commissioner in the Department of Housing and Urban Development. After leaving his Federal Government post in 1966, Hill resumed his law practice in Richmond, Virginia as a partner in the law firm of Hill, Tucker and Marsh. Hill has served as an officer or member on the board of many national, state and local organizations, including the National Legal Committee of the NAACP, the National Bar Association, the Southern Conference for Human Welfare, the National Association for Intergroup Relations Officials, the Virginia State Bar Bench Bar Relations Committee and the Old Dominion Bar Association, which he co-founded. Hill's accomplishments as a civil rights advocate and litigator have earned him many awards and citations including the “Lawyer of the Year Award” from the National Bar Association in 1959, the “Simple Justice Award” from the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund in 1986, the American Bar Association “Justice Thurgood Marshall Award” in 1993 and the “Presidential Medal of Freedom” in 1999. Most recently, he received the American Bar Association Medal for 2000, the National Bar Association &lbquo;Hero of the Law” award in August 2000, and in September 2000, he and other LDF lawyers were honored with the ”Harvard Medal of Freedom“ for their role in the Brown v. Board of Education decision.
Answer:
I believe that it is unconstitutional
Explanation:
n a 6-1 decision known as Engel v. Vitale, the Supreme Court ruled that the prayer was unconstitutional as a violation of the establishment clause of the First Amendment. Justice Hugo Black delivered the opinion of the court. In the following excerpt he first gives the background to this case, noting the contents of the prayer and the resulting lawsuit. He then explains that the Court agrees with the petitioners that this prayer is unconstitutional because it was composed by government officials to promote religious beliefs. Black claims that even though the prayer is nondenominational and voluntary, it still involves indirect coercion because the government is behind it. Black was a Supreme Court associate justice from 1937 to 1971, where he was known as a defender of civil liberties. Prior to serving on the Court he was a lawyer and a U.S. senator.
