subject
Social Studies, 31.01.2020 08:01 tfhdg

Federal courts have jurisdiction over issues that arise between states because article 3 of the constitution gives judicial powers to the supreme court article 3 of the constitution specifies that all controversies between two or more states are federal responsibility the constitution does not specify and anything not specified in the constitution is federal responsibility state constitutions specify that all controversies between states need to be reviewed by the federal government as a neutral third party

ansver
Answers: 2

Another question on Social Studies

question
Social Studies, 22.06.2019 05:40
Asocial science theory focusing on the inborn nature of social traits and the role of evolution in shaping human behavioral patterns. b. the view that society is governed by interrelated parts that make up the smoothly functioning whole. c. the individual's sense of femaleness or maleness. d. behaviors that focus on feelings and relationships among members of a group. e. the belief that men are superior to women and should control all important aspects of society. f. the process of acquiring and internalizing the ideas and behaviors deemed appropriate for males and females by their society. g. behaviors that focus on the accomplishment of specific tasks for a group rather than on personal feelings. h. the physical and biological aspects of male and female. i. cultural attributes of masculinity and feminity. j. provides a hypothesis of why males are dominant and females submissive.
Answers: 2
question
Social Studies, 22.06.2019 10:00
When and why were fingerprints first used in the united states
Answers: 1
question
Social Studies, 23.06.2019 03:00
Which are components pf a political party? why do we need political parties give reason.
Answers: 2
question
Social Studies, 23.06.2019 06:00
Ahusband who believed that his wife was having an affair with his brother hired an arsonist to burn down the brother's house. they planned for the husband to take his brother to a ballgame so that the arsonist would be able to set the house on fire without detection. after the husband and brother left for the ballgame, however, the arsonist decided to abandon the plan and immediately left town without doing anything further. when the husband returned from the ballgame with the brother, he saw the house still standing and blurted out what was supposed to have happened. the husband and the arsonist were arrested and charged with conspiracy to commit arson. at the arsonist's trial, his attorney argued that he was innocent of the conspiracy because he decided not to go ahead with the plan, and nothing criminal had in fact occurred.at common law, how should a jury find the arsonist? a not guilty of conspiracy, because going to a ballgame is not a criminal overt act.b not guilty of conspiracy, because the husband, not the arsonist, committed the overt act.c guilty, because the husband executed his part of the plan.d guilty, because the arsonist agreed to set the brother's house on fire.
Answers: 2
You know the right answer?
Federal courts have jurisdiction over issues that arise between states because article 3 of the con...
Questions
question
Mathematics, 19.12.2019 00:31
Questions on the website: 13722360