Which best describes how the outcome of Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) helped define the role of the federal government? The Supreme Court decided that only federal laws, not state laws, could be considered by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court decided that the federal government had key powers over state governments. The Supreme Court decided that state laws were superior to those of the federal government. The Supreme Court decided that the federal government should be structured in a specific way.

The Supreme Court decided that the federal government had key powers over state governments.

Explanation:

Gibbons v. Ogden was the case filed in the Supreme Court in 1824. The case was about supremacy power to operate commerce was given to whom, state government or federal government.

Gibbons and Ogden, both were steamboat operators. Gibbons got his license to navigate on interstate waterways, approved from the federal government whereas, Ogden got his license approved from the state government to navigate on the state's waterways.

Ogden filed the complaint against Gibbins, in the Court of Chancery, New York, stating that the state should limit Gibbins interstate waterways navigation.

When the case went to Supreme Court, the court gave verdict in favor of Gibbins stating that as per the Commerce Clause, Article 1, Section 8, the power to operate commerce is given to federal government and thus eliminating any power to state government for the same.

Thus the correct answer is the second option, that Supreme Court of US decided that federal government had key powers over state government.

he believed that congress would be better not dealing with "lobbyists", or people who seek to influence (a politician or public official) on an issue, since historically, they had problems with these kinds of people. he thought lobbying produces benefits, but should be carefully monitored.

hey i did something like that before, what is the quesiton?