Popular Sovereignty is your answer.
Hope this is helpful! Have a good one.
Buddhism is the religion that emphasizes detachment <span>from worldly goods, originated in India and missionaries spread it to China, Japan, and other parts of Asia. Buddhism is a non theistic religion.</span>
The amendment that some Americans criticized as not going far enough to make suffrage universal was A. the Fifteenth Amendment, which granted the vote to African-American men. Around the period of the Civil War, campaigns for women's suffrage had begun to take hold. Many argued that the 15th Amendment should have expanded its scope and included women; however, the men responsible for the 15th Amendment feared that adding women to the mix could doom the amendment to failure. They argued that women were excluded in order to guarantee that at least African-American men be given the right to vote.
Answer:
Explanation:
The Scientific Revolution was not a revolution in the sense of a sudden eruption ushering in radical change, but a century-long process of discovery in which scientists built on the findings of those who had come before from the scientific achievements of the ancient Greeks to the scholarly contributions of Islamic.
Greatness came after the Scientific Revolution the period saw a fundamental transformation in scientific ideas across mathematics, physics, astronomy, and biology in institutions supporting scientific investigation and in the more widely held picture of the universe. The Scientific Revolution led to the establishment of several modern sciences.
Answer: Appointing judges to the court.
Explanation: Firstly, enforcing a law doesn’t really limit the power of the judicial branch because they can simply strike down the law if it’s unconstitutional. Secondly, the President does not have the power to approve judicial nominations. That is only the Senate’s job. The President can appoint or nominate them, but the Senate is the one who approves.
Also, vetoing laws doesn’t limit the Judicial Branch’s power really in any way. Now, the correct answer is: Appointing judges / justices to the courts. This is because this power can not be limited at all by the judicial branch, only by congress. The Senate can deny the confirmation / appointment of a President’s appointee, and the Congress can also impeach that appointee later on for committed high crimes. The Judicial Branch can’t do any of that. The President can limit the Judiciary’s power by appointing judges that will go against any potential agenda of the Judicial Branch. For instance, if there happens to be liberal Supreme Court, whereas a majority of the members of the Supreme Court identify as liberal or were appointed by a Democratic President, a Republican President may want to nominate / appoint a conservative Justice or Justices to cancel out their majority and re-take the majority of the court. Honestly, this was a poorly worded question (not your fault at all, but the person who wrote it) because this doesn’t limit the power of the Judicial Branch in terms of its constitutional structure and powers, it merely limits and restricts the narrative or agenda of the members of the branch. Anyway, your answer is B: Appointing judges to the court.
