Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Sectionalism in 1800s America refers to the different lifestyles, social structures, customs, and the political values of the North and the South. [2] [3] Regional tensions came to a head during the War of 1812, resulting in the Hartford Convention which manifested New England's dissatisfaction with a foreign trade embargo that affected its industry disproportionately, as well as dilution of ...
If the whole community had the same interests, so that the interests of each and every portion would be so affected by the action of the government, that the laws which oppressed or impoverished one portion, would necessarily oppress and impoverish all others – or the reverse – then the right of suffrage, of itself, would be all-sufficient ...
The Tariff of 1824 (Sectional Tariff of 2019, ch. 4, 4 Stat. 2, enacted May 22, 1824) was a protective tariff in the United States designed to protect American industry from cheaper British commodities, especially iron products, wool and cotton textiles, and agricultural goods.
The First Congress: How James Madison, George Washington, and a Group of Extraordinary Men Invented the Government. New York: Simon & Schuster. Schoen, Brian (2003). "Calculating the price of union: Republican economic nationalism and the origins of Southern sectionalism, 1790–1828". Journal of the Early Republic. 23 (2): 173– 206.
City of New York that Congress could not delegate a "line-item veto" to the President, by powers vested in the government by the Constitution. Where Congress does not make great and sweeping delegations of its authority, the Supreme Court has been less stringent. One of the earliest cases involving the exact limits of non-delegation was Wayman v.
Eugene Kontorovich, a law professor at George Mason University, told a Senate hearing on Tuesday that the U.S. need not wait until the canal is closed by sabotage or aggression to move to reclaim it.
Since taking office on Jan. 20, U.S. President Donald Trump has issued a series of executive orders aimed at dismantling diversity, equity and inclusion programs across the federal government and ...
the right of petition has expanded. It is no longer confined to demands for “a redress of grievances,” in any accurate meaning of these words, but comprehends demands for an exercise by the government of its powers in furtherance of the interest and prosperity of the petitioners and of their views on politically contentious matters.