Which of the following best describes the U. S. Supreme Court's ruling in the Dred Scott v. Sandford case in regards to the Missouri Compromise and popular sovereignty? Group of answer choices

Both the Missouri Compromise and popular sovereignty were deemed to be unconstitutional

Both the Missouri Compromise and popular sovereignty were deemed to be constitutional

The Missouri Compromise as constitutional, but popular sovereignty was unconstitutional

The Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional, but popular sovereignty was constitutional

The Court ruled that no African American could be a citizen and that Dred Scott was still a slave. The court also ruled that the Missouri Compromise of 1820 was unconstitutional.

Explanation:

Both the Missouri Compromise and popular sovereignty were deemed to be unconstitutional

Explanation:

If i remember correctly from when I learned it, that was the conclusion.

1) the taiping rebellion was prompted from 1850-1864 and waged against the ruling of machu qing dynasty. the rebellion was caused by hong xiuquan and class differences, later leading to a radical change in social and economic structure.

3) karl marx, a believer of the principle of socialism, believed that the working class would have to free themselves from the exploitation of industrialists by establishing a radical socialist classless society where all industries and   property are owned by the state.

5) as indians revolt gained power, people found additional reasons to protest against the british rule. princely families joined the uprising due to changes to the inheritance law which made adopted children ineligible to assume the throne. this was an attempt by the british to control royal succession in the princely states that were nominally independent from the british.

a is your answer

have a great day

may i be brainliest?

~courtney