HELP ASAP Opinions in which Supreme Court justices express disagreement with majorities have
often proven more influential over time, or at least been more elegantly and
powerfully written, than majority opinions because:

A)dissenters have no need to please a majority, and may also write to persuade
other justices, or appeal to a larger legal community about an issue.

B)the dissent assignments are handed out with special care, more so than
assignments for majority opinions.

C)people are more likely to side with underdogs, as much in Supreme Court cases
as in life.

D)chief justices assign dissenting opinions when seeing conflicting decisions
between lower courts on the horizon.

the of atp are the key to its ability to store and supply energy;

phosphate

the phosphate groups of atp are the key to its ability to store and supply energy. atp releases energy when it breaks bonds between its phosphate groups.

it was certainly a debatable decision, mainly because it was based primarily on political - and not on legal or social - views. since the congress at that time was led by members of the republican party, and the territory that the tribes wanted to turn into an exclusively indian state was predominantly democratic, the proposal (as expressed in the constitution) did not succeed, but the constitution itself proved to be of crucial importance in the creation of the state of oklahoma, and, most importantly, it guaranteed the involvement of representatives of the indian tribes in the government of the future joint state.  

as a member of congress, i would have voted to ratify the constitution, or at least to have it tabled. ignoring it was an interested and partial decision.  

set times for each and always know when there coming