Correct answer: on the basis of the age of sitting judges.
Context/explanation:
President Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) was eager to implement his New Deal programs as an antidote to the Great Depression. However, the US Supreme Court had already ruled that some provisions of the New Deal were unconstitutional, because they took too much power into the hands of the federal government, especially the executive branch of the federal government. So, riding the momentum of his landslide reelection victory in 1936, in February of 1937, FDR proposed a plan to expand the Supreme Court to as many as 15 judges. The plan offered to provide full pay to justices over age 70 who would retire. If the older justices didn't retire, assistant justices (with full voting rights) would be appointed to sit with those existing justices. This was a way FDR hoped to give the court a liberal majority that would side with his programs.
As it turned out, before FDR's proposal came up for a vote in Congress, two of the sitting justices came over to his side of the argument, and the Supreme Court narrowly approved as constitutional both the Social Security Act and the National Labor Relations Act. So his plan (which failed in the US Senate) became unnecessary to his purposes.
Roosevelt's "court-packing" scheme was unpopular. It was seen as an attempt to take away the independence of the judicial branch of government.
Answer: A. Enslaved people were sent to the americas by spanish and Portuguese as laborers.
Explanation:Slavery has been a concept that lived with humanity for a long time, but the Portuguese and Spanish changed it deeply. Before them, slavery was connected with those who lost a war or had debts or were born is a low social class.
With the Spanish and the Portuguese, they started to explore the Continent of Africa and use Africans as slaves in the Americas. This started around the 1500s and lasted a few centuries. With this exploration, slavery became directly linked to race and color of the skin, something that did not happen before the exploration of the African countries.
Enslaved workers from Africa were sent to the middle colonies to work in the mines digging for coal.
Enslaved workers from Africa were brought to New England to do the dangerous jobs of fishing and whaling.
Few enslaved workers from Africa were needed in the South because the growth of cash crops was limited.
The number of enslaved workers from Africa increased in the South because they were needed to grow labor-intensive crops.
How did the Navigation Acts set limits on colonial exports?
Goods had to be shipped to British ports before being sold to other countries.
Ships from other countries could only deliver limited goods to the colonies.
The colonies were taxed on items they received from other countries.
The colonies were not allowed to ship any goods to Britain.
In the first question, the correct answer is the fourth option: The number of enslaved workers from Africa increased in the South because they were needed to grow labor-intensive crops. The economy in the South was based on plantations and slavery. Plantation farms for cash crops like rice, tobacco and sugar cane demanded extensive labor for cultivation. To cope with the demand, wealthy planters turned to slave traders, who imported slaves from Africa to work on the plantations. So great was the demand for slave labor, that slavery became the backbone of the Southern Colonies. It is believed that, in the antebellum South, slaves constituted about one third of the population in the South.
In the second question, the correct answer is the first option: Goods had to be shipped to British ports before being sold to other countries. The Navigation Acts were a series of mercantilist laws passed by Britain in order to foster her mercantile marine and protect her interests in North America. In 1651, Britain passed the first of a series of Navigation Acts. These acts stipulated, among other things, that goods imported from Asia, Africa, or the Colonies to Britain could travel to Britain, or any British colony, only in British ships or of the particular colony, it also established that all the commodities coming from the Colonies had to be trans-shipped through Britain first, restricting colonial trade.
by producing inspirational radio programs that were broadcast to GIs
by working in civilian jobs that had typically been held by men
by running for political offices that men were unavailable to fill
The answer really depends on whether the farmer is also the landlord or only a worker in the fields, and bearing in mind that the question refers only to Chavez’ reforms, not what is now called Chavismo, that is to say, the rule of President Maduro.
If the first, then there are chances that the landlord would feel threatened about the fact this his land could be —although not necessarily— appropriated by the State, but also, he might feel relieved to learn that his land could be more productive since there would be a lot more subsidies for farming since the oil revenues of the country would again be in the hands of the State.
If it is the second possibility, the farmer most likely would feel relieved altogether since subsidies to labor power and farming would mean greater income and better living conditions for him and his family.
Answer:
Like many farmers and laborers, I likely would support the changes that Chávez brought about because they helped Venezuela’s poor. As president, Chávez introduced education, healthcare, and labor initiatives to improve the quality of life for the lower classes of Venezuela.
Explanation:a