people get upset
The Southerners believed that the teriffs violated their states rights. PS. DeDe_swagg01 on instagram follow me.
yes
I dont KNOW the Answer?
Yes, Dred Scott's civil rights were violated in the landmark case Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857). The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that African Americans, whether enslaved or free, could not be American citizens and therefore lacked the standing to sue in federal court. This decision effectively denied Scott and others like him basic legal protections and rights, reinforcing the institution of slavery and institutional racism in the United States.
Southerners argued that states' rights were violated by the evolution of slavery because they believed that individual states should have the authority to determine their own laws regarding slavery without federal intervention. They viewed federal actions aimed at restricting or abolishing slavery as an infringement on their sovereignty and autonomy. This perspective was rooted in a commitment to the Constitution, which they interpreted as allowing for the protection of their economic and social systems based on slave labor. Consequently, they framed the debate as a matter of preserving their rights as states against what they perceived as overreach by the federal government.
Yes. And when that happens, courts take a dim view of it, usually in favor of a defendant whose rights have been violated, even to the point of dismissing charges.
Non, slaves had no rights. They were considered property. However, by modern standards, they had all their rights violated.
A government in power may argue that rights can be violated if
Pizza
The right to bare arms. No shirts, no shoes!
The colonists think the writs of assistance violated their rights because they wanted it to be secure in their home.
yes
Report to court
nothing
No
By anti-semitism
i can't