IT was estimated about 800,000 Vietnam .
Reportedly, it cost the lives of more than one million people
I believe the anwer is <span>federal jurisdiction.
When a person obtain patent or copyright for a certain invention, that person obtain the full right of that invention all across states in the united states.
The people who violate this are subjected to aboout 6 months in jail and the total expense that the holder had to suffer because of the infringement.</span>
Considering the available options, the two statements that best describe the strategies of the Northern and Southern leaders during the Civil War include "<u>Union leaders intended to blockade, invade and divide the South."</u>
- This was done during the American Civil War as the North blocked the ports in the South to cut off the supply from foreign countries, especially Europe.
- The North also invaded and divided the South into two at the Mississippi River while destroying their infrastructure.
The second statement that best describes the strategies of the Northern and Southern leaders during the Civil War is that "<u>Confederate leaders hoped that Northerners would soon tire of the war."</u>
- This is because Confederates are generally the majority of the United States Army, and they believe their military ancestry would give them the edge to wear down the Union.
The American Civil war occurred between 1861 and 1865. The North are termed the Union, while the South are termed the Confederates.
Hence, in this case, it is concluded that the correct answer is options C and F.
Learn more about the American Civil War here: brainly.com/question/20487049
Answer:
Stanley Matthews and the court of justice concluded that its application violated the Equal Protection Clause. Thus, even if the law is impartial, "if it is applied and administered by the public authority with an evil eye and an uneven hand making unjust and illegal discrimination between people in similar circumstances, the denial of equal justice is still within the prohibition of the Constitution" . Thus, the Court concluded that the action represented "a practical denial by the State of this equal protection of the law" and, therefore, violated the rights of Yick Wo and other Chinese laundry owners.
Explanation:
