The iron curtain refers to the line that separated the Soviet satellite states of eastern Europe from western Europe. The term "iron curtain" was chosen to describe the degree of separation that existed between Communist and non-Communist states in Europe and to describe the repression and force by the USSR in the establishment of its sphere of influence. <span>I think that western leaders were so concerned about the Iron Curtain because it represented the Soviet Union's continued desire to expand, the threat of war with the Soviet Union, and the overall threat of Communism.</span>
Expecting a situation similar to World War I, France resorted to the Maginot line to protect it from a possible German invasion.
The Maginot line was a defense barrier built along the French-German border line. It comprised heavy concrete and steel walls, mine camps, bunkers, and fortresses.
Its objective was to reinforce the defense of the border with Germany, after many historical invasions from that area. It was described at the moment as a technology marvel.
However, it failed in its strategy, since it was focused on previous technology and not on new developments. Moreover, the Germans invaded from the northern border with Belgium, sorting the Maginot line.
You can learn more about it in the link below:
brainly.com/question/461471
#SPJ4
The Supreme Court asserted that it has the right to declare laws of Congress unconstitutional.
It was sort of a roundabout way in which the principle of judicial review was asserted by the Supreme Court in the case of Marbury v. Madison. William Marbury had been appointed Justice of the Peace for the District of Columbia by outgoing president John Adams -- one of a number of such last-minute appointments made by Adams. When Thomas Jefferson came into office as president, he directed his Secretary of State, James Madison, not to deliver many of the commission papers for appointees such as Marbury. Marbury petitioned the Supreme Court directly to hear his case, as a provision of the Judiciary Act of 1789 had made possible. The Court said that particular provision of the Judiciary Act was in conflict with Article III of the Constitution, and so they could not issue a specific ruling in Marbury's case (which they believe he should have won). But the bottom line was, the Court had taken up the right of judicial review by calling out a portion of the Judiciary Act of 1789 as unconstitutional.
I'm pretty sure the answer is true.
I hope this helps!
