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
Leto [7]
3 years ago
11

When the north vietnamese took over saigon, how did the south vietnamese react?

History
2 answers:
Ira Lisetskai [31]3 years ago
8 0

Answer:

Its a

Explanation:

i just got it right o the test

Yuri [45]3 years ago
6 0

Answer:

b

Explanation:

You might be interested in
Antonym for diaspora
Alla [95]
There is not a specific antonym for diaspora, but the opposite of a diaspora would be the regrouping of a community or the coming together of a community. It could also be a renewal of a specific cultural group or ethnicity coming back together in a sort of revival of their culture. 
8 0
3 years ago
✏️Con ayuda de tu familia, elijan y conjuguen 5 verbos en tiempo
Furkat [3]

Answer:

I take a shower every day.

You brush your hair every morning.  

She only dries her hear when it´s cold outside.

We put on a tie only for formal meetings.  

They cut their hair every three months.  

Explanation:

Al conjugar verbos en presente simple para los sujetos “I”, “you”, “we” y “they”, se usa el infinitivo. En cambio, para las terceras personas (“he”, “she” y “it”,) se añade una letra “-s” al final del verbo,, aunque existen excepciones ortográficas en la tercera persona, dependiendo de la letra final del verbo, similar a la forma en que se construye el plural de los sustantivos.

7 0
3 years ago
What was not an issue in the Watergate scandal?
Pie

Answer:

c) impeachment

Explanation:

5 0
3 years ago
10 POINTS
netineya [11]

Answer:

Judicial review is the power of the courts to declare that acts of the other branches of government are unconstitutional, and thus unenforceable. For example if Congress were to pass a law banning newspapers from printing information about certain political matters, courts would have the authority to rule that this law violates the First Amendment, and is therefore unconstitutional. State courts also have the power to strike down their own state’s laws based on the state or federal constitutions.

Today, we take judicial review for granted. In fact, it is one of the main characteristics of government in the United States. On an almost daily basis, court decisions come down from around the country striking down state and federal rules as being unconstitutional. Some of the topics of these laws in recent times include same sex marriage bans, voter identification laws, gun restrictions, government surveillance programs and restrictions on abortion.

Other countries have also gotten in on the concept of judicial review. A Romanian court recently ruled that a law granting immunity to lawmakers and banning certain types of speech against public officials was unconstitutional. Greek courts have ruled that certain wage cuts for public employees are unconstitutional. The legal system of the European Union specifically gives the Court of Justice of the European Union the power of judicial review. The power of judicial review is also afforded to the courts of Canada, Japan, India and other countries. Clearly, the world trend is in favor of giving courts the power to review the acts of the other branches of government.

However, it was not always so. In fact, the idea that the courts have the power to strike down laws duly passed by the legislature is not much older than is the United States. In the civil law system, judges are seen as those who apply the law, with no power to create (or destroy) legal principles. In the (British) common law system, on which American law is based, judges are seen as sources of law, capable of creating new legal principles, and also capable of rejecting legal principles that are no longer valid. However, as Britain has no Constitution, the principle that a court could strike down a law as being unconstitutional was not relevant in Britain. Moreover, even to this day, Britain has an attachment to the idea of legislative supremacy. Therefore, judges in the United Kingdom do not have the power to strike down legislation.

Explanation:

nationalparalegal.edu /JudicialReview.aspx

6 0
3 years ago
What methods did Emmeline Pankhurst advocate be used to achieve the right to vote for women? Why did she feel justified in using
Brilliant_brown [7]

Explanation:

In 1903, she founded the Women's Social and Political Union, which used militant tactics to agitate for women's suffrage. Pankhurst was imprisoned many times, but supported the war effort after World War I broke out. Parliament granted British women limited suffrage in 1918.

3 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Why are rubrics provided for student throughout the course?
    12·1 answer
  • Can congress limit slavery in the Louisiana territory under the provisions in the Missouri compromise?
    12·1 answer
  • Which of the following is an example of why a specific place may be regarded as sacred by Native American people?
    13·1 answer
  • How is the principle of states' rights reflected in the Declaration of Independence or the Articles of Confederation?
    10·2 answers
  • what are some similarities and differences between presidential reconstruction and radical reconstruction
    5·1 answer
  • what is you.................................................................................................
    5·1 answer
  • Match the rulers with their nations.
    9·1 answer
  • Which principle is illustrated by the popular election of the members of North Carolina's Council of State?
    15·1 answer
  • Do you believe warfare should be used to gain more territory and achieve your national interests? Explain.
    6·1 answer
  • Bartolomé de Las Casas worked to
    14·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!