Over which of the following does the Supreme Court have original jurisdiction?
1.) a case in which citizens of one state challenge citizens of another state
2.) a case in which a person robs a grocery store
3.) a case in which an individual is accused of murdering someone
Answer:
Explanation:
1.) a case in which citizens of one state challenge citizens of another state.
The Constitution grants the Supreme Court original jurisdiction in cases involving disputes between two or more states, also known as "cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be a party." Therefore, the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction over a case in which citizens of one state challenge citizens of another state.
The Supreme Court generally does not have original jurisdiction in criminal cases, such as a case in which a person robs a grocery store or an individual is accused of murdering someone.
Use excerpts below to answer
a) Briefly explain ONE major difference between Bailey's and Patterson's interpretations.
b) Briefly explain how someone supporting Bailey's interpretation could use ONE piece of evidence from the period between 1945 and 1955 not directly mentioned in the excerpt.
c) Briefly explain how someone supporting Patterson's interpretation could use ONE piece of evidence from the period between 1945 and 1955 not directly mentioned in the excerpt.
Answer:
a) Briefly explain ONE major difference between Bailey's and Patterson's interpretations. Bailey's interpretation emphasizes the importance of social context in shaping behavior, while Patterson's interpretation focuses on the role of reinforcement in behavior modification.
b) Briefly explain how someone supporting Bailey's interpretation could use ONE piece of evidence from the period between 1945 and 1955 not directly mentioned in the excerpt. For instance, they could point to the fact that during this period, the United States government implemented policies aimed at containing the spread of communism, both domestically and abroad. This could be seen as evidence supporting Baileys interpretation that the Cold War was a result of American imperialism and expansionism.
c) Briefly explain how someone supporting Patterson's interpretation could use ONE piece of evidence from the period between 1945 and 1955 not directly mentioned in the excerpt. For instance, someone supporting Patterson's interpretation could use the fact that during this period, African Americans continued to face discrimination and segregation in various aspects of their lives, such as education and housing. This evidence supports Patterson's argument that the civil rights movement was necessary to challenge and dismantle these unjust systems.
Explanation:
How did Lee Kuan Yew bring Singapore into the modern age? List some of his policies.
Which of the following contributed to the Rwandan Genocide?
O European colonists continued to control the economy in Rwanda
O European colonists took back control of the Rwandan government
O European colonial policies had reinforced ethnic prejudices
O The threat of terrorism and nuclear war led to ethnic tensions
The option that contributed to the Rwandan Genocide is European colonial policies had reinforced ethnic prejudices
What is the Rwandan Genocide?Rwanda was under the governance of Germany and subsequently Belgium throughout the epoch of European colonization. An ethnic hierarchy was established by the colonial powers through their preference of the Tutsi minority while overlooking the larger Hutu population.
Therefore, By issuing identity cards categorized by ethnicity, the colonial authorities strengthened the differentiation between the two factions. These regulations caused the emergence of ingrained biases and agitation among different ethnic groups, etc.
Learn more about Rwandan Genocide from
https://brainly.com/question/27330411
#SPJ1
to what extent did the development of African diaspora contribute to emergency of pan Africanism in 1900
Answer:
The development of African diaspora played a significant role in the emergence of pan-Africanism in 1900. It brought together people of African descent from different parts of the world, who shared a common history and experience of oppression, and provided a platform for them to unite and fight for their rights.
Explanation:
In your OWN words, summarize what happened to the titans at the end of the roaring 20s and the Great Depression.
will chose brainlest, write something about war.
War is a devastation and complication that has afflicted human history for generations. It causes devastation, pain, and death, as well as political and societal turmoil. Warfare continues to occur, despite numerous technical improvements and diplomatic efforts to prevent it, inflicting wounds that can remain for centuries. War affects not only those immediately involved in the fight, but also civilians and future generations. It serves as a reminder of the need of working for global peace, diplomacy, and understanding.
War is a destructive and devastating force that has plagued humanity for centuries. It involves armed conflict between nations or groups, resulting in immense loss of lives, destruction of property, and long-term socio-economic consequences. Historically, wars have been fought for various reasons such as territorial expansion, political power, resources, religious beliefs, or ideological differences. Despite advances in technology and international diplomacy, wars continue to occur, often with catastrophic consequences.
The impact of war is far-reaching, affecting not only the combatants but also innocent civilians, including women and children. It tears apart families, communities, and entire nations, leaving a lasting legacy of trauma, grief, and suffering. War also drains resources from society and diverts precious funds to military expenditure, at the expense of health, education, and social welfare needs. Moreover, it exacerbates existing inequalities, perpetuates human rights violations, and fuels extremism and terrorism. Therefore, it is essential to promote peace, diplomacy, and non-violent conflict resolution, rather than resorting to the deadly and destructive option of war.
Hope This Helps!
Brigham Young
is associated
with which
Christian faith
that
experienced
religious
intolerance?
A. Mormons
B. Judaism
C. Protestants
D. Baptists
Answer: mormons
Explanation:
What led to uncertainly about the future of the European Union
Answer: between the EU and its wider global environment, between unity and deep diversity, and between different modes of political economy and levels of development.
Explanation:
you need to explore what “appeasement” was in regard to Hitler’s actions in the 1930s and discuss a couple of examples. Make sure to include the response of the leaders from France and Great Britain at the time and why you believe they acted as they did. This is hypothetical…but how should the world have possibly reacted instead?
Answer:
Appeasement was a policy adopted by European powers towards Hitler's actions in the 1930s, which involved giving in to his demands in an attempt to avoid war. The policy was motivated by the fear of another world war, given the devastation caused by World War I, and the belief that Hitler's demands were reasonable and could be satisfied without the need for military action.
One example of appeasement was the Munich Agreement of 1938, in which France and Great Britain agreed to let Germany annex the Sudetenland region of Czechoslovakia, with the hope that this would satisfy Hitler's territorial ambitions and prevent war. Another example was the Anschluss of Austria, in which Germany annexed Austria in 1938 without any significant opposition from other European powers.
The response of the leaders from France and Great Britain at the time was to adopt a policy of appeasement towards Hitler's aggressive actions. The French leader, Édouard Daladier, and the British Prime Minister, Neville Chamberlain, believed that appeasement would prevent another devastating war and that Hitler's territorial demands were reasonable.
However, this policy of appeasement ultimately failed, as Hitler continued to expand his territory and increase his military power. The invasion of Poland in 1939 finally led to the outbreak of World War II.
In hindsight, the world should have reacted differently to Hitler's actions in the 1930s. Instead of appeasement, a more firm and united response from European powers, particularly France and Great Britain, could have deterred Hitler and prevented the outbreak of war. For instance, economic sanctions or a military alliance could have been formed to counter Hitler's aggression. The lack of a strong and united response allowed Hitler to pursue his ambitions and ultimately led to the devastation of World War II.
you need to explore what “appeasement” was in regard to Hitler’s actions in the 1930s and discuss a couple of examples. Make sure to include the response of the leaders from France and Great Britain at the time and why you believe they acted as they did. This is hypothetical…but how should the world have possibly reacted instead?
Answer:
Appeasement was a policy adopted by European leaders towards Nazi Germany in the 1930s, which involved making concessions to Hitler in the hope of avoiding war. The term was coined by British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, who sought to avoid conflict with Germany at all costs. The policy of appeasement was based on the belief that Hitler's demands were reasonable and that he could be appeased by making concessions.
One of the most notable examples of appeasement was the Munich Agreement of 1938, which was signed by the leaders of France, Great Britain, and Italy. The agreement allowed Hitler to annex the Sudetenland region of Czechoslovakia, which was home to a large German-speaking population. The leaders of France and Great Britain believed that by allowing Germany to annex the Sudetenland, they could avoid war and maintain peace in Europe.
Another example of appeasement was the Anglo-German Naval Agreement of 1935, which allowed Germany to build up its navy and violate the terms of the Treaty of Versailles. This agreement was signed by the British government under the leadership of Neville Chamberlain, who believed that it would help to maintain peace in Europe by giving Hitler what he wanted.
The leaders of France and Great Britain at the time acted as they did due to a combination of factors. They were still reeling from the devastation of World War I and were hesitant to engage in another war. They also underestimated the extent of Hitler's ambition and believed that by making concessions, they could avoid conflict and maintain peace in Europe.
In hindsight, the world should have reacted differently. The policy of appeasement only emboldened Hitler and gave him the impression that he could achieve his goals through aggression. The world should have taken a stronger stance against Hitler's expansionist policies and sought to contain German aggression. It is possible that a more forceful response earlier on could have prevented the outbreak of World War II and the atrocities that followed.
Any agreement or effort between two parties
Any agreement or effort between two parties is called a Bilateral effort or a Bilateral agreement.
Agreements or efforts can take many forms, such as a contract, a treaty, a memorandum of understanding, or a joint venture. The terms of agreement or effort may be negotiated and agreed upon through formal or informal discussions and may be binding or non-binding depending on the circumstances and the parties involved.
Examples of bilateral agreements could include a business partnership, a divorce settlement, a labor contract, a loan agreement or a peace treaty between two countries. Such agreements or efforts can be important for achieving common goals, resolving disputes or establishing mutual benefits.
To learn more about the agreement visit:
brainly.com/question/15420974
The correct question is-
What is the term for "Any agreement or effort between two parties"?
Which city was the first capital of the United States?
Is elitism in the new democratic South Africa helping to maintain apartheid-era privileges?
Answer:
No, elitism in the new democratic South Africa is not helping to maintain apartheid-era privileges. In fact, the new governing elite mistakenly believes that the goal of a democratic South Africa is simply to extend to everyone what whites enjoyed under apartheid, which is a false premise. South Africa needs new thinking for its democracy to work for all. However, the monomaniacal focus on corruption, unthinkingly encouraged by much of the media, has created a situation in which there is a general elite consensus that corruption is our enemy, which is hindering the progress of democracy. The transition away from apartheid changed South Africa in a remarkable way, defying international expectations. South Africa's first democratic election with universal suffrage in 1994 was a success story for democracy.
No, elitism in the new democratic South Africa is not helping to maintain apartheid era privileges. In fact, the new governing elite mistakenly believes that the goal of a democratic South Africa is simply to extend to everyone what whites enjoyed under apartheid, which is a false premise.
How does elitism in the new democratic South Africa help to maintain apartheid-era privilege?No, elitism in the new democratic South Africa is not assisting in the preservation of apartheid-era privileges. In fact, the new ruling class incorrectly believes that the goal of a democratic South Africa is simply to extend to everyone what whites enjoyed under apartheid, which is a false premise. South Africa needs new thinking for its democracy to work for all. However, the monomaniacal focus on corruption, unthinkingly encouraged by much of the media, has created a situation in which there is a general elite consensus that corruption is our enemy, which is hindering the progress of democracy.
The transition away from apartheid changed South Africa in a remarkable way, defying international expectations. South Africa's first democratic election with universal suffrage in 1994 was a success story for democracy.
Learn more about elitism, here:
https://brainly.com/question/31894293
#SPJ2
Why do you believe that the Provisional Government was not able to stop the Coup from happening?
In my opinion, the Provisional Government's lack of legitimacy and failure to address the issues facing Russia made it vulnerable to a coup, which was eventually carried out by the Bolsheviks.
What is Provisional Government?A provisional government, also known as an interim government, an emergency government, or a transitional government, is a governmental authority formed to handle a political transition in the case of a newly founded state or the collapse of the previous governing administration.
Accordingly, alluding to the Temporary Government of Russia in 1917, which was built up after the February Insurgency and gone before the Bolshevik government, one reason why it may not have been able to halt the Overthrow from happening is due to a need of prevalent bolster and authenticity.
Learn more about Provisional Government here: https://brainly.com/question/29816979
#SPJ1
If a federal court hears a case and determines that it goes against the Constitution, then it is declared;
a.
in contempt of court
b.
unconstitutional
c.
guilty
d.
reviewable by a lower court
Answer:
b. unconstitutional
"The Holocaust is one of the biggest tragedies of the 20 century. It has plundered an entire nation has taken millions of lives and has changed the history of mankind". In the context of the above statement, evaluate the impact of pseudoscientific ideas of race on the Jewish nation by the Nazi Germany during the period 1933 to 1946.
Answer:
The pseudoscientific ideas of race propagated by Nazi Germany led to the dehumanization and persecution of Jews, resulting in the Holocaust, one of the greatest tragedies in history.
Explanation:
What happened as a result of Spain's early exploration of the New World?
O A. Spain worked with other European countries to set up colonies.
OB. Spain was able to keep other European countries from settling in
Canada.
OC. Spain was able to establish colonies in large areas of both
continents.
O D. Spain developed good relations with the native populations.
B. Spain was able to establish colonies in large areas of both continents.
Explain in 2-4 sentences how the Federal Reserve plays a part in the circular flow model.
The Federal Reserve plays a key role in the circular flow model of the economy by regulating the money supply, which affects both households and businesses.
By adjusting interest rates and implementing monetary policy, the Federal Reserve can influence the amount of money flowing through the economy and the level of economic activity. This can impact the behavior of consumers and businesses, ultimately affecting the circular flow of goods, services, and money in the economy. The Federal Reserve also supervises and regulates banks and other financial institutions, which help to keep the financial system stable and promote the flow of credit in the economy.
Therefore, the Federal Reserve plays a crucial role in the circular flow model.
Learn more about Federal Reserve, here:
https://brainly.com/question/3603615
#SPJ1
Describe the first uniforms. Why might have that been the design choice? Do you agree to
disagree with that choice? Why or why not?
trena
Answer:
I believe that it is possible to agree to disagree with someone's choice, as long as both parties are respectful of each other's opinions and can maintain a healthy relationship despite their differences. It is important to recognize that not everyone will share the same views or make the same choices, and that diversity of thought and perspective can lead to growth and understanding.
Explanation:
(1) What is a political party? What is a proportional representation system? What is a “winner takes all system?” Would you prefer a winner takes all or proportional representation system in the United States? Why did you prefer one system to the other?
(2) What is a primary election? What is a general election?
(3) What are the statistics of race, gender, religion, education levels, region, and age identifications of the Democratic Party and Republican Party? In other words, who generally votes for which party?
(4) What do you believe (your personal opinion) can be done to change the volatile political situation in the U.S.?
(1) A political party is an organized group of individuals with similar political beliefs and goals that seek to gain political power and influence through elections.
Proportional representation is a voting system in which seats in an elected body are allocated based on the proportion of votes received by a political party or candidate.
A "winner takes all" system is a voting system in which the candidate with the most votes wins the election, regardless of whether they receive a majority or not.
(2) A primary election is a preliminary round of voting where political parties choose their candidate for the general election. A general election is a national election where voters choose their representatives to hold public office.
(3) The Democratic Party tends to attract more voters who are non-white, female, less religious, more educated, and younger, while the Republican Party tends to attract more voters who are white, male, more religious, less educated, and older.
(4) Emphasis on civility, empathy, and collaboration in political discourse is needed to change the volatile political situation in the U.S. Politicians and voters need to prioritize the common good over party loyalty by listening and considering opposing viewpoints.
Learn more about general election here:
https://brainly.com/question/11185151
#SPJ1
What surprised Ibn Battuta about the status and/or treatment of Mongol women?
What is the first step too amending the constitution
Answer: Step 1. Passage by Congress.
Explanation: Proposed amendment language must be approved by a two-thirds vote of both houses.
You can find out more about amending the constitution at the National Conference of State Legislatures' website, ncsl.org.
Huey Long’s “share our wealth” plan is often compared to president Roosevelt’s “new deal. “ choose all features that describe BOTH of these plans.
Several descriptions are shared by Huey Long's "Share Our Wealth" mission and President Roosevelt's "New Deal": their focus on fighting poverty and financial inequality.
features that describe BOTH of these plans.Both initiatives catered to those enduring the Great Depression with proposals of government inducement in the economy, investments in public sector projects, reforms of banking and finance sectors, higher taxes levied on wealthy class and business entities, plus incentives intended to develop the economy and generate jobs.
Nevertheless, these plans been heavily criticized for being too unrefined or extreme in their outlooks.
Read more on Huey Long here:https://brainly.com/question/27335556
#SPJ1
6
After the English Civil War, what was brought back to power during a period known as the Restoration?
A Enlightenment Movement
B Monarchy
Catholic Church
D Parliament
When the Monarchy was brought back to power was known as the Restoration. The Option B.
What was brought back to power during the Restoration?The Restoration was a period after English Civil War and the Commonwealth period that was marked by the return of the monarchy with the restoration of King Charles II to the throne.
The monarchy was abolished during the Civil War and replaced with the Commonwealth of England which was a republic but with the Restoration, the monarchy regained its position as the dominant political institution in England although Parliament also retained significant power.
Read more about Restoration
brainly.com/question/12881158
#SPJ1
Which sentence best describes the Battle of Bunker Hill?
A It was a victory for the Patriots after they were able to sink many British ships crossing the Charles River.
BThe Patriots had plenty of gunpowder, but were defeated by a British naval bombardment.
C The British attacked head-on and eventually won the hills, but only after losing more than a thousand men.
The British attacked head-on and eventually won the hills, but only after losing more than a thousand men.
D British soldiers ran out of gunpowder and fled after the Patriots started to advance across the Charles River.
The sentence that best described Bunker Hill battle was C The British attacked head-on and eventually won the hills, but only after losing more than a thousand men.
What happened at Bunker Hill ?On June 17, 1775, at the beginning of the American Revolution, the British Army, led by General William Howe, waged war against colonial militia on Breed's Hill in Charlestown, Massachusetts. This fortified point was frequently known as Bunker Hill.
In spite of their ammunition shortage and being outnumbered, the colonists managed to cause substantial harm to the English troops resulting in over a thousand casualties, with many officers among them. Nevertheless, due to limited supplies, the colonists evacuated the hill, enabling the British army to seize it, thus claiming triumph in the battle.
Find out more on Bunker Hill at https://brainly.com/question/15152623
#SPJ1
How does an amendment get added to the Constitution?
1. A state convention must be called to propose an amendment. It then must be voted on by the people to achieve ratification.
2. It gets proposed by the states and then passes through Congress with a two-thirds majority vote before being voted on by citizens.
3. It must pass the House and Senate with a two-thirds majority and then be ratified by three-fourths of the states.
4. It must pass through the House first and then get approved by three-fourths of the states before heading to the Senate.
Answer:
The correct answer is 3. An amendment to the Constitution must be proposed by a two-thirds vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, or by a convention called for by two-thirds of the state legislatures. Then, the proposed amendment must be ratified by three-fourths of the states (38 out of 50) either through their legislatures or through special state conventions.
This process is outlined in Article V of the United States Constitution, which provides two methods for proposing amendments and two methods for ratifying them. The method of proposal and ratification used for each amendment depends on the circumstances and preferences of the time.
Explanation:
3. It must pass the House and Senate with a two-thirds majority and then be ratified by three-fourths of the states. Hope this helps! :)
Explain the organs of the following names:Christopolis,Monrovia and Liberia
Answer:
Christopolis is not the name of an actual city or organ. However, "Christo" is a Greek word meaning "anointed one" or "messiah", and "polis" means "city". Therefore, "Christopolis" could be interpreted as a hypothetical city named after Jesus Christ.
Monrovia is the capital city of Liberia, a country located in West Africa. Monrovia was named after James Monroe, the fifth President of the United States, who played a significant role in the founding of Liberia in the early 19th century. The city serves as the political, economic, and cultural center of Liberia, and is home to several important institutions such as the University of Liberia and the National Museum of Liberia.
Liberia is a West African country bordered by Sierra Leone, Guinea, Côte d'Ivoire, and the Atlantic Ocean. Founded in 1847 as a republic for freed American slaves, it boasts a rich heritage, beautiful beaches, dense rainforests, and diverse wildlife. Home to over 4 million people, Liberia's capital city is Monrovia.
The death of President Lincoln created a void in the United States that could not be replaced during Reconstruction.”Instructions: For this assignment, you will write an essay explaining your position regarding the above quote.Your essay must be at least 250 words and should: •Take a clear and firm position on the subject.•Present evidence to support your stance.•Discuss opposing viewpoints and weaknesses in those arguments.•Present your argument in a logical and sensible order.•Use complete sentences, proper spelling, and proper grammar
Abraham Lincoln was assassinated in 1865. He was the driving force behind Reconstruction. He implemented a number of policies to heal the wounds of the civil war and address the systemic problems of racism and inequality. After his death, this vision faded and the country did not find a clear direction.
How does it create a void?The assassination of President Abraham Lincoln in 1865 had a profound impact on the United States. Some believe his death left a void that national reconstruction cannot fill. While others believe the administration could have continued without Lincoln, I believe his death dealt a significant blow to the nation's ability to heal and rebuild.
First, Lincoln was the driving force behind Reconstruction, with the goal of unifying the country and rebuilding the South. He implemented a number of policies to heal the wounds of the civil war and address the systemic problems of racism and inequality. After his death, this vision faded and the country did not find a clear direction. At the same time, Lincoln was an integral figure respected by both Republicans and Democrats.
He had a special compromising quality that brought together the people necessary for the success of reconstruction. With his death, there was no one left to fill this leadership void and the country was torn apart.
Opponents of this claim may argue that Lincoln's reconstruction plans were flawed and that his death did not significantly affect America's ability to rebuild. However, there are obvious weaknesses in this argument. Lincoln's policies had limited success, and his death left a significant leadership vacuum that prevented further progress.
Ultimately, I believe the death of President Lincoln left a void in America that Reconstruction could not fill. Lincoln's vision, leadership, and ability to bring people together were essential to the success of Reconstruction.
Without him, the country lacks clear direction and leadership, slowing progress and hindering the country's ability to heal and rebuild.
learn more about Abraham Lincoln: https://brainly.com/question/856804
#SPJ1
100 points please help
3 concrete details about being a soldier during World War I. This might include daily life, a description of a battle, how soldiers are handing the trench conditions, the need for supplies, loss of friends, missing life, or other topics that you have researched.
5-6 sentences.
Answer:Trench Warfare: Soldiers during World War I had to endure long periods of trench warfare, where they had to live in narrow, muddy, and rat-infested trenches. The constant threat of enemy fire, disease, and exhaustion made it difficult for them to maintain their physical and mental well-being.
Battle of the Somme: One of the bloodiest battles of World War I was the Battle of the Somme. On July 1, 1916, British forces launched an offensive against German lines. In just one day, over 19,000 British soldiers were killed, and many more were wounded. The battle lasted for months, and the total number of casualties on both sides exceeded one million.
Supplies and Logistics: In addition to the dangers of combat, soldiers during World War I had to deal with shortages of food, water, medical supplies, and ammunition. The logistical challenges of supplying troops in the front lines were enormous, and soldiers often had to go without basic necessities for days or even weeks at a time. This made their already challenging lives even more difficult, and many soldiers suffered from malnutrition and other health problems as a result.
Being a soldier during World War I was an arduous and challenging experience. One concrete detail was the grueling daily routine that soldiers endured, which included long marches, regular drills, and the constant threat of enemy attack. Another detail was the horrific conditions in the trenches, with soldiers having to contend with mud, rats, and disease. In battles, soldiers had to face terrifying weapons, such as gas attacks and machine guns, which could kill many in a matter of seconds. Supplies, such as food and ammunition, were also scarce, and soldiers often had to make do with limited resources. Additionally, the loss of friends and missing life back home added to the psychological burden that soldiers carried.
Explanation:
Answer:
Explanation:
Soldiers in World War I needed to know how to repair things, like trench networks, and camps. Basic things like this could be learned on duty, but was very useful to have already known. Another thing they did was inspect riffles, or riffle inspections, which is finding out which riffles weren't safe to fire. They also check for rust and carbon. The last thing they did was write letters to their families, because the war then was overseas, depending on where they lived. It was a very had life as a soldier in WWI.