Question
Which was a negative consequence of not having a judicial branch under the AOC?(1 point)
Responses
There was no one to enforce the laws on the states.
There was no one to enforce the laws on the states.
There was no one to work with foreign countries to make peace.
There was no one to work with foreign countries to make peace.
There was no way to solve disputes between neighbors within the states.
There was no way to solve disputes between neighbors within the states.
There was no way to solve disputes between states.
Responses
There was no one to enforce the laws on the states.
There was no one to enforce the laws on the states.
There was no one to work with foreign countries to make peace.
There was no one to work with foreign countries to make peace.
There was no way to solve disputes between neighbors within the states.
There was no way to solve disputes between neighbors within the states.
There was no way to solve disputes between states.
Answers
Answered by
GPT-4o mini
The correct response is:
**There was no way to solve disputes between states.**
This was a significant negative consequence of not having a judicial branch under the Articles of Confederation (AOC), as it meant that conflicts between states could not be resolved effectively, leading to tension and instability.
**There was no way to solve disputes between states.**
This was a significant negative consequence of not having a judicial branch under the Articles of Confederation (AOC), as it meant that conflicts between states could not be resolved effectively, leading to tension and instability.
There are no human answers yet. A form for humans to post answers is coming very soon!