0
Johnson granted pardon's to people who took an oath of loyalty, No pardons would be available to high Confederate officials and persons owning property valued in excess of $20,000. Not only that but he felt a state need to abolish slavery before it could be readmitted. He also was not a great people person.
A clash between Johnson and congress was inevitable at this point. But eventually congress brewed up a plan(pardon the term) Congress passed the civil right bill in 1866, when President Johnson vetoed a bill to extend the life of the Freedmen's Bureau. Congress wanted to amend it to include protection for the black population. So as you can see congress didn"t really have a plan for reconstruction so they differ very extremely.
sorry for any falsifications i may have made it been a while
Still curious? Ask our experts.
Chat with our AI personalities
Professor
Taiga
Coach
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
How did mercantilism and social political inequalities provoke resentment in American revolution?
Idk 😐
Why did Hamilton's financial plan provoke so much opposition?
Farmers and Poor people believed that the national bank would make the rich richer and would not help the poor people progress. It favored the wealthy people.
What are the cause of political instability?
Poverty, bad conditions for the average people, anger of the people towards the government, etc. All of these are reasons that provoke political instability in the form of crime, revolutions, rebellions, civil wars and other forms of revolting.
Which was an important goal of the Congress of Vienna?
The chief goal of the Vienna decision makers was to create a lasting peace by establishing a balance of power and protecting the system of monarchy.
What supreme court case stresses that a students first amendment rights to free speech do not stop at the schoolhouse door?
Tinker et al. V. Des Moines Independent Community School District, et al., 1969 Tinker and several students were suspended for wearing black arm bands in protest of the Vietnam war. The school argues that it had an interest in limiting free speech to preserve the peace at school because the arm bands could provoke retaliation. The Supreme Court didn't buy the argument noting specifically that the protest was peaceful and passive, and that the threat of some theoretical disturbance was insufficient grounds to suspend the first amendment, noting that virtually any spoken word in class might provoke or offend someone. The court ruled that "in our system, state operated schools may not be the enclaves of totalitarianism. School officials do not possess absolute authority over their students"
