Why was Roe v. Wade a controversial case? It challenged bans on birth control being used by married couples. It supported the legality of separate but equal facilities for different races. It argued that privacy extends to a woman’s reproductive system. It demonstrated that segregation was completely unequal. It showed that the 14th Amendment could not be extended to individuals.

Answers

Answer 1
Answer:

Roe v. Wade was a controversial case because  it argued that privacy extends to a woman’s reproductive system. Jane Roe was a Texas citizen who had filed a lawsuit against her state which banned abortion. She did it with the help of her lawyer Sarah Weddington. They lost their lawsuit in the Texas courts, but the US Supreme Court made an opposite decision after debating the case.

Further explanation

The judges in this court accepted part of Sarah Weddington's argument that Texas anti-abortion laws were against the US Constitution, specifically against the XIVth Amendment, which protects the privacy of citizens. In this amendment, it said:

« No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. »

In the case of Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decided that a state could not deprive a woman of her freedom to make abortion if it does not have consequences for the health of the mother or the baby. The right to privacy ends as soon as it has an impact on other people's lives, their safety, or their freedom.

Learn more

  1. Plessy v. Ferguson: brainly.com/question/1332681
  2. The Fifth Amendment: brainly.com/question/1487419
  3. McCulloch v. Maryland: brainly.com/question/1373726

Answer details

Subject: History

Chapter: The famous Supreme Court cases

Keywords: abortion in the United States, the right to privacy in the US Constitution, 14th amendment


Related Questions

In City, why does the author describe how slaves contribute to building Verbonia?A. to suggest that Roman city builders were not skilled B. to honestly depict how Roman cities were built C. to entertain readers with invented details about Roman city building D. to make readers admire Roman city builders
What was george pattons innovation in the battle against pancho villa in mexico
In what ways did the Glorious Revolution differ from the American and French Revolutions
What was the name given to the British practice of taking American sailors from their ships and forcing them to serve in the British navy
In 1902, President Roosevelt became involved in and supported the workers in a strike in what industry?

"I announce I will sign an executive order to deny federal contracts to businesses that hire illegal immigrants. We are still a nation of immigrants; we should be proud of it. But we are also a nation of laws." -- President Clinton, 1996 State of the Union Address Which of the following statements best explains the quote?
a. The government should give all companies a fair chance at acquiring government work even if it hired non-citizens.
b. The government would not consider hiring companies that had employed unlawful residents.

Answers

Answer: b. The government would not consider hiring companies that had employed unlawful residents.

The quote states that the government will not consider giving federal contracts to businesses that hire illegal immigrants. The reason Clinton gives for this executive order is that businesses that do so disregard the laws of the country. And while he believed immigrants to be an important addition to the United States, the laws need to also be valued at all times.

I've noticed that the rest of the options are missing. But it doesn't matter as the answer is b. The government would not consider hiring companies that had employed unlawful residents.

What world leader once trained to become a priest?

Answers

Answer:

Joseph Stalin

(Soviet political leader)

Traditional West African religions include a belief that ancestor can intervene in peoples daily lives. This is called

Answers

Explanation:

The belief that ancestors can intervene in people's daily lives is commonly referred to as ancestor worship or ancestor veneration. It is a significant aspect of many traditional West African religions.

In these belief systems, ancestors are considered to be powerful spiritual beings who have the ability to influence the fortunes and well-being of their living descendants. They are believed to possess wisdom, experience, and a close connection to the spiritual realm. As a result, people seek their guidance, protection, and blessings.

Ancestor worship involves various practices and rituals aimed at honoring and communicating with the ancestors. These may include offerings of food, drink, and other items at ancestral shrines or gravesites, prayers, libations, and ceremonies. The rituals are often performed by designated individuals, such as priests or family members, who act as intermediaries between the living and the deceased.

The belief in ancestor intervention is deeply rooted in the cultural and spiritual traditions of many West African societies. It reflects a belief in the ongoing presence and influence of deceased family members within the lives of their living descendants.

HELPPPPPExplain which people worked to spread Christianity in lands encountered by Europeans,
and then evaluate their achievements and mistakes."

Answers

Christianity is not a western religion. It originated on the Western fringe of Asia – what we tend to call the ‘Middle East’. However, for many centuries the expansion of Christianity was directed from Europe and became entangled with the growth of the great European empires. Today over two-thirds of the world’s Christians live outside Europe, which has reverted to what it was in the days of the early Church – unbelieving territory on the margins of the faith. The texts that you can look at here tell part of the story of how European Christians spread their message. They reveal some of their assumptions that we might now find strange or unacceptable. They also point to some of the reasons why Christianity would eventually take deep roots in other cultures – not least through the translation of the Bible into many different languages.

In which year did Italy and Bulgaria enter the war?a. 1914
b. 1915
c. 1916
d. 1917
Which of the following correctly lists the alliances that fell into place after the assassination of Archduke Francis Ferdinand and his wife, Duchess Sofia?
a. Austria-Hungary, Germany and the Ottoman Empire versus Serbia, Russia, France and Great Britain
b. Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire and Serbia versus France, Germany, Russia and Great Britain
c. Serbia, France, and Russia versus ...

Answers

Answer:

B.1915

Explanation:

The Kingdom of Bulgaria participated in World War I on the side of the Central Powers from 14 October 1915, when the country declared war on Serbia, until 30 September 1918, when the Armistice of Thessalonica came into effect.

i hope i helped

In the 1930s, what did the United States do to avoid getting involved international affairs? a.) Joined the League of Nations. b.) Passed the Hawley-Smoot Tariff. c.) Passed the Neutrality Acts. d.) Joined the United Nations. one month agoone month agoEdit Question

Answers

The correct answer is C, as in the 1930s, the United States passed the Neutrality Acts to avoid getting involved in international affairs.

The Neutrality Acts were a series of laws passed by the United States Congress in the 1930s in response to the growing conflict in Europe and Asia that would eventually lead to World War II. They were generated by the strong isolationist sentiment in the United States that followed its costly participation in World War I and sanctioned to ensure that the US was not again going to be involved in external conflicts, especially in Europe.


In the 1930's the United States passed the Neutrality Acts to avoid getting involved in international affairs. They did this to remain neutral and not pick a side one way or the other.