Answer:
The Court upheld the statute only in the case of states that could provide matching funds; and if matching funds could not be provided.
Explanation:
The case was resolved 7-2 with the majority vote wrote by the Chief Justice William Rehnquist. It stated that the statue was a valid interpretation of the Spending Clause and that it was not unconstitutional. Congress has the authority of regulating the spends but not till the point they applied coercion.
I hope this answer helps you.
Answer:
B. Every 10 years after the census.
Explanation:
Gerrymandering occurs every 10 years and is going to be occurring this year after the 2020 election and census
Answer:
The last one is answer of the question D) All the above
Explanation:
The opinion stated that although a baker, in his capacity as the owner of a business serving the public, "might have his right to the free exercise of his religion limited by generally applicable laws", a State decision in an adjudication “in which religious hostility on the part of the State itself” is a factor
hope this helps you
have a nice day:)
