Answer:
Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 (1857), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court held that the Constitution of the United States was not meant to include American citizenship for black people, regardless of whether they were enslaved or free, and therefore the rights and privileges it confers upon American citizens could not apply to them.[2][3] The decision was made in the case of Dred Scott, an enslaved black man whose owners had taken him from Missouri, which was a slave-holding state, into the Missouri Territory, most of which had been designated "free" territory by the Missouri Compromise of 1820. When his owners later brought him back to Missouri, Scott sued in court for his freedom, claiming that because he had been taken into "free" U.S. territory, he had automatically been freed, and was legally no longer a slave. Scott sued first in Missouri state court, which ruled that he was still a slave under its law. He then sued in U.S. federal court, which ruled against him by deciding that it had to apply Missouri law to the case. He then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court
Answer:
I would say B- The People
Explanation:
The Articles and the Constitution were both written by the same person (I'm pretty sure). The Constitution gave the people the rights to elect representatives which is also known as Limited Government. It basically includes the civic virtue of the American citizens (like voting).
Plus, all of the other answers include positions that are part of the givernment so it doesn't even make sense.
Answer:
C.
Explanation:
An enemy combatant is a member of an enemy organization during a time of war. In this case, choice C is the closest answer to that.
Answer:
Indeed much of the key expansion of the Roman Empire occurred while it was still a Republic. Rome was an empire long before it was imperial. However, perhaps the key difference that the modern viewer sees between an imperial system and a republic is one of political participation and by extension legitimacy.
Explanation:
Answer:
It established the precedent of Judicial Review
Explanation:
Because the court's job was to decide if the midnight judges would get their pension despite the shift in power, it estblished judicial review which allowed the supreme court judges to rely on the constituion to judge the legislative or exectutive branches actions. This contributes to checks and balances, giving more power to the judiciary.
