Answer:
The answer is collective behaviour.
Explanation:
Collective behaviours can be explained as spontaneous behaviours which do <u>not</u> reflect a social structure. These behaviours are influenced by groups, and the people involved in them would normally not engage in said activities.
Some examples of collective behaviours are riots and other social movements.
Through the success of the women's rights movements during the mid 20th century America has emphasized that there is no difference in who makes the money in the household. However, this may be different in other countries where money is soley put on the soldiers of men.
I believe the answer is: The case was appealed and overturned at the state or federal appellate court level.
The supreme court has the highest standing compared to other courts on the lower level. Before a case could be handled in the supreme court, it need to pass both the state and appellate court. Even after passing the lower court, there is only around 1% chance that the case would be heard in the supreme court.
What argument would I present? I would present that everyone is equal and everyone has a voice if you had asked them to speak, people have different outlooks on being able to vote at 18 or 21. But I don't know much about voting, I don't, and don't plan on, voting ever. Soooooo.....
