1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
pickupchik [31]
3 years ago
12

12. Arkansas and Louisiana are in a dispute over who controls the water of the Mississippi River. Their case goes to the U.S. Su

preme Court. Under which type of jurisdiction does this fall?
I don't understand this at all...if you could briefly explain it in simpler terms as well, it would be appreciated. Thanks!
History
1 answer:
Elenna [48]3 years ago
6 0
I believe federal but I could be wrong
You might be interested in
Why did the capital of Poland have to be moved during the Piast reign?
JulsSmile [24]

Answer: (D) The capital had been conquered .

Explanation:

4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
What was the Aztec society like
Vsevolod [243]

Answer:

The Aztec civilization was also highly developed socially, intellectually and artistically. It was a highly structured society with a strict caste system; at the top were nobles, while at the bottom were serfs, indentured servants and enslaved workers

Explanation:

7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Is this a good question ?
krok68 [10]

Answer:

YES THATS PERFECT !

Explanation:

3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
How did the Aryan language influence India?
ycow [4]

Answer:

B-Important religious texts were written in Sanskrit.

Explanation:

6 0
3 years ago
why is it in the presidents best interest to nominate several federal judges favored be most senators?
slamgirl [31]
During the summer of 1787, the delegates to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia established equal representation in the Senate and proportional representation in the House of Representatives.  Called the “Great Compromise” or the “Connecticut Compromise,” the unique plan for congressional representation resolved the most controversial aspect of the drafting of the Constitution.  

In the weeks before the Constitution’s framers agreed to the compromise, the delegates from the states with large populations argued that each state’s representation in the Senate should correspond to the size of the state.  Large-state delegates promoted James Madison’s Virginia Plan, the document that was the basis for several of the clauses in the Constitution.  Under this plan, the Senate and the House would base their membership on the same proportional “right of suffrage.”   That is, the number of senators in each state would be determined by its population of free citizens and slaves.  Large states, then, stood to gain the most seats in the Senate.  As justification for this advantage, delegates noted that their states contributed more of the nation’s  financial and defensive resources than small states, and therefore, required a greater say in government.

Small-state delegates hoped to protect states’ rights within a confederate system of government. Fearing the effects of majority rule, they demanded equal representation in Congress, as was practiced under the Articles of Confederation and assumed in William Paterson’s New Jersey Plan.  In fact, some framers threatened to withdraw from the convention if a proportional representation measure passed.  

Other delegates sought a compromise between large-state and small-state interests.  As early as 1776, Connecticut’s Roger Sherman had suggested that Congress represent the people as well as the states.  During the 1787 convention, Sherman proposed that House representation be based on the population, while in the Senate, the states would be equally represented.  Benjamin Franklin agreed that each state should have an equal vote in the Senate except in matters concerning money.  The convention’s grand committee reported his motion, with some modifications, to the delegates early in July.  Madison led the debates against Franklin’s measure, believing it an injustice to the majority of Americans, while some small-state delegates were reluctant even to support proportional representation in the House.  On July 16, delegates narrowly adopted the mixed representation plan giving states equal votes in the Senate within a federal system of government.

Once delegates established equal representation in the Senate, they needed to determine how many senators would represent each state.  State constitutions offered some guidance.  Several states designated one senator per county or district, while in Delaware there were three senators for each of the three counties.  Convention delegates did not refer to the state precedents in debate, however.  Instead, they seemed to take a common-sense approach in deciding the number of senators.

According to constitutional commentator Joseph Story (1779-1845), few, if any, delegates considered one senator per state sufficient representation.   Lone senators might leave their state unrepresented in times of illness or absence, and would have no colleague to consult with on state issues.  Additional senators, moreover, would increase the size of the Senate, making it a more knowledgeable body, and better able to counter the influence of the House.   On the other hand, a very large Senate would soon lose its distinctive membership and purpose, and actually decrease its ability to check the lower house or to allow senators to take personal responsibility for their actions.

Given these considerations, delegates had a limited choice regarding the number of senators.  During the convention, they briefly discussed the advantages of two seats versus three.   Gouverneur Morris stated that three senators per state were necessary to form an acceptable quorum, while other delegates thought a third senator would be too costly.  On July 23, delegates filled in the blank in the proposal offered by Morris and Rufus King: “That the representation in the second branch consist of _____ members from each State, who shall vote per capita.” Only Pennsylvania  voted in favor of three senators.  When the question turned to two, Maryland alone voted against the measure, not because of the number, but because Martin disagreed with per capita voting, which gave each senator, rather than each state, one vote.

6 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • As a result of the Great Railroad Strike of 1877, railroad companies lost millions of dollars because
    7·2 answers
  • Which of the following is a secondary effect of acid deposition?
    11·2 answers
  • Most thunderstorms form as a result of ..
    10·1 answer
  • Describe the League of Nations ?
    7·2 answers
  • Two lines of Hebrew poetry that mean the same are called a:
    10·1 answer
  • What major battle was fought near the town of Sharpsburg, Maryland?
    7·2 answers
  • Which of the following did George Washington do during his presidency?
    15·1 answer
  • europeans concluded that their influence in Africa and Asia was beneficial but overlooked the fact that these religions already
    7·1 answer
  • How were black codes similar to slavery?
    15·2 answers
  • Is it hard hard hard hard. Hard hard
    6·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!