The correct answer for this question would be letter choice A) or the first option.
Answer:
Legally, representatives of the Electoral College have the right to vote as they like and for whom they want, ignoring the results of popular vote in their states. State governments, for their part, have the power to impose monetary fines and, in some states, to revoke such votes. The general situation was clarified by the Supreme Court in 1954 in the ruling in Ray v. Blair. It was clarified that the states and parties to which the electors belong have the right to demand from them a preliminary “pledge to vote” and provide for actions in case of violation of such an oath, but they cannot prosecute electors in the framework of criminal procedure of the Code for breaking such an oath.
Now, the Supreme Court places emphasis on the protection of the popular will, which gives voters the task of voting for the required candidates. If this were not the case and the voters chose with absolute freedom which candidate to vote for, the popular will would be severely impaired and the voters would be practically the only voters who would define the destiny of the federal government.
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
It is true that some historians have argued that United States foreign policy has more often been motivated by economic interests than by the desire to spread democratic and humanitarian ideals around the world.
I mean, it is clear that the United States has many political and economic interests in different parts of the world. This was so notorious in tikes of the Cold Wolrd when it competed against the Soviet Union in the arms race, the space race, and the spread containment of Capitalism/Communism.
To what extent is this argument convincing with regard to United States foreign policy between 1890 and 1919?
Well, to the extent of the following evidence.
1.- President James Polk's ambition to apply Manifested Destiny. He offered money to México to get the territory of California and New Mexico. Mexico rejected the offer and the result was the Mexican-American War in which the US victory resulted in the annexation of the northern Mexican states.
2,. The Spanish-American War victory allowed the US to control the Philippines, Guam, and Puerto Rico.
3.- The James Monroe Doctrine and the Theodore Roosevelt Corollary.
The president would be able to veto the bill that the Congress made and can just publicly say that the reason the veto is being done is because it violates the U.S. Constitution. The Supreme Court, on the other hand, could simply review it if a lawsuit about the law was filed, and then declare it unconstitutional.
