Based on the constitutional clause identified in part A, explain why the facts elucidated in Easley v. Cromartie might have led to a different holding than the holding in Shaw v. Reno.

the noble might have thought that the system was far because they had lot of things and riches and the serf would have thought that the feudal system was un fair because of the way they were treated.

your mothers brothers brother in law would be your father.

your answer is 1930's

explanation

this is just around the time the great depression was starting and putting the us ecnomy into ecnomic failure causing the goverment to take a much larger rule to try and pieace it back together