The constitutional principle that worked during the estimation of the 2010 Census is referred to as reapportionment.
<h3>Which constitutional principle worked in the 2010 Census?</h3>
- In 2010, there was a census held in the United States that was widely participated in.
- The result of the census was determined through reapportionment.
- In conducting the decennial census, the seats of the U.S. House of Representatives were reapportioned.
- The seats of the legislative body are distributed among administrative units and subdivisions.
- This had a direct impact on the elections conducted in 2012.
- Therefore, reapportionment was a constitutional principle operative in the 2010 decennial census.
- Article two of the US Constitution explains the nature, scope, and features of reapportionment.
Therefore, the constitutional principle that worked during the estimation of the 2010 Census is referred to as reapportionment.
Learn more about the 2010 United States Census here: brainly.com/question/3217491
#SPJ2
The bombing of Pearl Harbor brought the United States into WW2. The United States stayed out of the way until this event because it was the breaking point for the nation. America had been attacked without what they deemed was a good reason and hundreds had been killed and injured.
Answer:
C. Career military soldiers
Explanation:
This is a conflict of individual rights versus state protection. For some, the individual rights come first even if it is an attack on others or could put the country at risk. For others, the protection of the country is more important and therefore a person who speaks in a way that threatens the country should and can be silenced.
Schenck v. US is a famous case where the court ruled if the speech presents a danger to the country then the 1st Amendment right is not applicable and can be denied.
Tinker v. Des Moines School District demonstrated when a person peacefully protest even in a school against the government and their decisions (Vietnam War in this case), then the 1st Amendment is applied and the individual rights upheld.
There has been a debate about border control. Donald Trump wants to take action through buidling a wall along the border but the democrats do not want this. This creates a policy gridlock, where no policy is passed due to each party not wanting the other party to get its way.
