The extent that were lives of enslaved Africans different from the lives of European indentured servants in the seventeenth-century north American colonies are -
Depending on the time and region in history, several factors have influenced African Americans' legal status in North America. African laborers' civil status was not defined by regulations in the early years of colonization. Black employees appear to have had a social position akin to that of white indentured slaves from Europe, who were contractually bound to labor for their owners for certain periods of time.
Black men and women, particularly in New Amsterdam, started to enjoy certain permissions that would later be denied to enslaved blacks in America, despite the fact that their station was that of inferiority that made them amenable to mistreatment by masters. Black servants could, for instance, sue their employers in court like white servants might. Some, such as Pedro Negretto and Manuel Rues, who filed lawsuits for unpaid wages, even succeeded.
To know more about servants here
brainly.com/question/10854124
#SPJ4
Google should have the answer to ths
Answer:
C) the idea that the plans are reuniting the nation without resolving the fundamental conflicts at the root of the division between North and South
Answer: C) Creating awareness about nature
Explanation:The Civilian Conservation Corps was one of the most prosperous New Deal plans of the Great Depression. It survived for less than 10 years but left a legacy of strong, smooth roads, bridges, and buildings throughout the United States. Between 1933 and 1941, more than 3,000,000 men worked in the CCC. Chattahoochee National Forest, in Georgia, was reforested over a measure of nine years by the Civilian Conservation Corps. The Civilian Conservation Corps was established to implement a short-term cause of relief for young men that were sustaining in the Depression.
The ruling determined that the Judiciary Act of 1789 was unconstitutional.
In doing so, 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.
