Answer: They thought that it was unfair to have Parliament make the Americans pay taxes when they had no say in the decision
Explanation: Trust me bro
Answer: Reliance on legal precedent
Explanation:
Reliance on legal precedent should be a key factor in court's ruling since if stakeholders cant's success on mediating their reliance on precedent forfeit, then any claim they'do therefore, it'll be taken under stare decisis doctrine. This comes from a judicial theory that states: when a pronouncement has built enough reliance, then a presumption against adjudicative change must follow.
<span>Certainly not. The United States has never, since its founding, consisted of a small number of citizens, still less of citizens that could practically assemble in one place at one time and debate their actions. A pure democracy in this classical Greek city-state sense was never practical, and was not seriously considered.
What the Framers created was a constitutional representative republic. Sovereignty is vested in the people, like a democracy (and unlike a constitutional monarchy), but the people do not rule directly. Instead, they elect representatives, at regular intervals, and these rule in the peoples' stead. Their powers are limited, first, by the fact that they are elected for only short terms, and must be re-elected if they wish to continue in power, and secondly, and much more importantly, by the Constitution itself, which puts express written limits on their powers even between elections.</span>
Answer:
A:Church Leader
Explanation:
They were all rasict in the south in that time and southern children would have parents who owned slaves wouldn't be able to own there own individual slaves for themselves
