"<span>Amendments may only be added if they are ratified by each state in the Union" would be the best option, since the Founding Fathers wan't to ensure that the amendment process was taken seriously. </span>
The demand was that Austrian officials should take part in the investigation into the assassination and in the hunting down and prosecution of the ring-leaders on Serbian territory, which would have infringed Serbia's state sovereignty. Serbia was required to react within 48 hours.
As for the Austro-Hungarian authorities participation in this investigation, the Serbian Government cannot accept it, because it would violate the Constitution and the law on criminal procedure.
The Austrians fully expected Serbia to reject these demands, allowing Austrian forces to invade Serbia and quickly defeat them before their ally and protector, Holy Mother Russia, could react militarily.
So after that, what do <u>you</u> think? Obviously yes.
<u>Answer:</u>
<em>A. The constitution already limited Powers of government, so a list of rights was not needed. </em>
<em></em>
<u>Explanation:</u>
The idea behind having a Constitution is that it limits the powers of the government and sets certain law and rules that are to be followed while governing. Hence when there were debates for the "ratification" of the Constitution, the Federalists concluded that the Constitution didn’t require any list of rights, as the Constitution itself limits the powers of the government. Moreover, Bill of Rights was unnecessary as the Constitution was drafted with a strong concept of "Separation of Powers", and the Check and Balance system. Under this the government has been divided into three categories and these three categories check and limit the powers of each other.
All state governments are modeled after the federal government and consist of three branches: executive, legislative, and judicial. The U.S. Constitution mandates that all states uphold a "republican form" of government, although the three-branch structure is not required.
Dred Scot was taken to live in St.Louis by his slaveholder. this is because during his trial, he stated that since his slaveholder had taken him to live in a free state, that meant that he was now a free man. hope this helps!
