ASAP 10 POINTS!! I"LL ALSO MARK YOU BRAINLIST!!!How did the Embargo Act and the Louisiana Purchase promote Jefferson’s goals?

In completing the Louisiana Purchase, Jefferson had to put aside his principles because this type of transaction was not expressly mentioned in the Constitution. Had he waited for a constitutional amendment, however, the deal might have fallen through. With the support of the American people, Jefferson decided to go through with the purchase.

Jefferson needed to move quickly when he discovered that Spain had signed a secret treaty with France in 1801 ceding Louisiana to France. France suddenly posed a potential threat to America. The fear was that if America did not purchase New Orleans from France, it could lead to war.

The change of ownership from Spain to France resulted in the closure of the port's warehouses to Americans, and it was feared that France would move to cut off America's access to the port entirely. Jefferson sent envoys to France to try to secure the purchase of New Orleans. Instead, they returned with an agreement to buy the entire Louisiana Territory as Napoleon needed money for the impending war against England.

Economically, the embargo devastated American shipping exports and cost the American economy about 8 percent in decreased gross national product in 1807. With the embargo in place, American exports declined by 75%, and imports declined by 50%—the act did not completely eliminate trade and domestic partners. Before the embargo, exports to the United States reached $108 million. One year later, they were just over $22 million.

Yet Britain and France, locked in the Napoleonic Wars, were not greatly damaged by the loss of trade with Americans. So the embargo intended to punish Europe's greatest powers instead negatively impacted ordinary Americans.

Although the western states in the Union were relatively unaffected, as they had at that point little to trade, other parts of the country were hit hard. Cotton growers in the South lost their British market entirely. Merchants in New England were the hardest hit. In fact, discontent was so widespread there that there was serious talk by local political leaders of seceding the from Union, decades before the Nullification Crisis or the Civil War.

- "schenck v. united states, case in which the u.s. supreme court ruled on march 3, 1919, that the freedom of speech protection afforded in the u.s. constitution's first amendment could be restricted if the words spoken or printed represented to society a “clear and present danger.” "

- speech aimed to potentially create danger could be banned.

< 3

logging hope this