Which of the following was at the root of calhoun’s arguments against the tariff? 1.that states could determine the constitutionality of laws. 2.that states would compromise with the federal government on laws. 3.that states had the right to protest any federal laws. 4.that state leaders could declare laws unconstitutional.

4. i belive. hopefully this helped

The right answer is 4.That state leaders could declare laws unconstitutional.

After the unexpected passage of the Tariff of 1828, called the “tariff of abominations” by its critics because it pushed rates up to almost 50 percent of the value of imported goods, a tariff designed mainly to protect northern manufacturers from foreign competition. Calhoun had no choice but to join those in opposition or give up his base of political support in his home state. He proposed that a special state convention could declare a federal law null and void within the state’s borders because it violated the Constitution.

thurgood marshall

explanation: in 1954, thurgood marshall and a team of naacp attorneys won brown v. board of education of topeka, kansas. in this landmark decision, the supreme court held that segregation in public education violated the equal protection clause of the fourteenth amendment.

not really a history or a question at all.

explanation:

maybe this isn't the best place to ask this, maybe a social media platform like twitter or instagram? -austin