<span>The role of Monroe Doctrine in the history of the United States of America. ... and for the Western Hemisphere had been launched before Monroe's address to ... In July, 1823, Adams made hisconcerns known to Russian minister in Washington. .... we have never taken any part, nor does it comport with our policy so to do.</span><span>
</span>
Hi there!
Because this question has been posted before, I'll post my previous response here.
The case of Gibbons v. Ogden was a landmark Supreme Court case decided in 1824 concerning the power of the states to regulate interstate commerce. This case involved a steamboat owner, Thomas Gibbons, who did business between New York and New Jersey and the then governor of New Jersey, Aaron Ogden. Gibbons argued that the monopoly Ogden had was a violation of the commerce clause of the Constitution and therefore not valid. This proved to be the case. In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court decided that this law conflicted with federal law and the powers the federal government had to regulate interstate commerce. Under the Constitution, Congress has all powers necessary and proper to carry into effect the laws that it passes. This reinforced that clause.
External criticism is very important when it comes to analyzing data, because as a researcher it is possible to get too "close" to the data, in that one can stop being objective and start looking for ways to match the data to the desired results.
If u want it fast here you go
the answer is"<span>a. manufacturing processes"</span>
Answer:
The powerful people won the election.
Explanation:
Tactics such as donating money to political campaigns may be considered a drawback because due to this money the powerful people won the election instead of competent people which cost the country a lot. If there is no money used for political campaigns so the more competent person won the election that leads to increase in the prosperity and development of the country and its people.
