The answer is <u>b) It increased federal intervention in the affairs of independent states.</u>
By the time these federal Acts were enacted in the U.S., several Northern states had already abolished slavery but it was legal in the Southern states. The Fugitive Slave Acts of 1793 and 1850 allowed for the capture and return of runaway slaves within the territory of the United States, aiming to prevent that the Northern states would become safe havens for runaway slaves.
The last act was more rigid in their provision and stated more regulation, including the guarantee of harsher punishments for anyone interfering in runaways slave's capture, the right of slave owners and their “agents” to search for escaped slaves within the borders of free states and compelled citizens to assist in their capture as well. It also denied slaves the right to a jury trial, among others.
The Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 implied much government's intervention in the state's affairs, and this angered most northern states. They responded by intentionally neglecting the law or creating acts that nullified or that protected black people, the so-called "personal liberty laws", and by making great efforts to assist runaway slaves, among others.
Answer:
Electoral College
Explanation:
Who: delegates at the Constitutional Convention
What: A system of voting for president where the populace votes for electors who cast their votes for candidates for president (usually following their party's views or the popular vote). The number of votes per state = number of senators + number of representatives in the House of Representatives.
When: created 1787
Where: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Why: Because, in the founders' eyes, the average the average citizen wasn't smart or well versed enough in politics to actually choose their own president.
Significance: This is the system that is still used today to pick the president.
Answer:
It indicates that public opinion can lead the political elite to alter government policy.
Explanation:
Public opinion plays a role within a democracy, but it is necessary to take into account that those opinions can vary from circumstance to cirmcumstance and also from one democracy to another one.
If it is true that opinions do not really have the capacity to influence the majority of government policies, it is also true that they can set limits for the rulers to operate.
