B. king, lord, clergy, knight, serf
Ос.
Answer:
No. In an 8-1 decision authored by Chief Justice Morrison Waite, the Court concluded that the relevant sections of the Enforcement Act lacked the necessary, limiting language to qualify as enforcement of the Fifteenth Amendment. The Chief Justice first stated that the Fifteenth Amendment "does not confer the right of suffrage upon any one," but "prevents the States, or the United States, however, from giving preference…to one citizen of the United States over another on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude." In examining the language of the Enforcement Act, the Court noted that, while the first two sections of the act explicitly referred to race in criminalizing interference with the right to vote, the relevant third and fourth sections refer only to the "aforesaid" offense. According to the Court, this language does not sufficiently tailor the law to qualify as "appropriate legislation" under the Enforcement Clause of the Fifteenth Amendment.
Explanation:
Answer:
The room is a salon, a lavish setting for fashionable gatherings.
Explanation:
I honestly have no clue what the answer is and I really would like to know as well
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
Although there are no options attached, we can say the following.
The most valid counter-argument to the description of the Mongols by the Russian duke was that the Mongols were interested only in plunder and treasure but not in controlling the Russian territory.
As we know by reading this part of history, the Mongols were terrible warriors that showed no mercy. They were fierce fighters that indeed were interested in destroying and plunder. And more than conquering and establish a form of government to rule a territory, by the way, they attacked and proceeded, it seemed that they were more interested in becoming wealthy.
