Answer:The court’s decision ruled that the laws of Louisiana were not in conflict with the Constitution. The justices wrote that Plessy’s defense wrongly assumed that separate facilities somehow made one race automatically inferior to another.
Further, they ruled that if one race is already socially inferior to another, there was nothing that the Constitution or other acts of legislation could do to fix that. To this end, the majority opinion states that the Fourteenth Amendment “could not have been intended to abolish distinctions based upon color, or to enforce social, as distinguished from political, equality, or a commingling of the two races upon terms unsatisfactory to either.”
Explanation: This comes directly from the answer.
Answer:
Tiêu chuẩn phát thải đặt ra giới hạn về lượng ô nhiễm mà một phương tiện hoặc động cơ có thể thải ra. EPA nhận ra rằng để giảm ô nhiễm nguồn di động, chúng ta không chỉ phải giải quyết các phương tiện, động cơ và thiết bị, mà còn cả nhiên liệu mà chúng sử dụng. Vì vậy, chúng tôi đã thiết lập các tiêu chuẩn lưu huỳnh cho xăng, nhiên liệu diesel trên đường và nhiên liệu diesel không đường.
No, he can say that's your opinion, but that is a weak ethical argument, he needs to say why he disagrees, and what are his view points on his reasoning, like why does he believe what he believes, just as person A does.
It was jams Madison who came up with the compromise <span />
