Question

Put yourself in the place of one of the lawmakers in 1787. You are present to represent your state. At the end, you realize that you have experienced “the art of compromise.” How will you describe to your neighbor what this compromise means?

Answer 1

The art of compromise can be described as a solution or agreement to an argument or a disagreement between two (or more) parties where neither of the two parties gets what they initial wanted in full. However the two parties do end up having a beneficial outcome from the final decision as the solution of what they initially wanted. For instance say you bought a box of cookies for you to bring to your friend's house to enjoy at a party. Later after some time at the party there was one cookie left, and you want to eat that cookie. However your friend also wants to eat that cookie, so instead of fighting for the cookie and only one of you end up happy. You cut the cookie in half making it into two cookies so that both you and your friend get what was wanted; just not in full.

Answer 2

the doctrine of nullification recommended that states living inside the union have the one-sided, inalienable ideal to void any law made by the national government that could be esteemed illegal.

the united states was shaped based on a general agreement among its individual states. hence, it is inferred that under the hypothesis of invalidation, since the states are the establishment of the union, they have the ability to referee and disprove unlawful laws.

Step-by-step explanation: