At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
I think I did this assignment, not sure tho
If you could help me figure out what to do for it that would be great. It's confusing because it has to be from his point of view.
did you make the "Blog" page for him?
Yeah i did everything else it needed except for two of the status updates
It was a template that was supposed to look like a facebook profile
true. ok, so what do you know about these two cases in relation to Andrew Jackson?
It says to describe his perspective on the cases
ok, let me research these cases
McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316 (1819), was a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States. The state of Maryland had attempted to impede operation of a branch of the Second Bank of the United States by imposing a tax on all notes of banks not chartered in Maryland.
that is what I found on the first case
This is info on the second case: Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 U.S. 1 (1824), was a landmark decision in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the power to regulate interstate commerce, granted to Congress by the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution, encompassed the power to regulate navigation.
Yeah I read something like that in the lesson it just didn't say anything about what Andrew Jackson thought about it
In your mind... pretend you are Andrew Jackson. (I am assuming that you know about him lol) Basically, take the info from each of the court cases and give YOUR opinion about them. Was what the court decided right? was it the best for the people?
He thought that the states should have more of an input within their own borders so I think that he probably wouldn't have agreed with the courts decision
Ok I think I know what I'm gonna do then. Thanks alot for your help!
No problem! Anytime! :)