2. details: what are 2-3 important/meaningful details or quotes? (evidence)
3. how, what, why, and who: what does the author believe is the common view of history? (comprehension)
4. interpretive: how will this information affect our study of history this year? (purpose/next step)
5. justification: do you agree or disagree with the author’s ideas on history? explain why. self-assessment
6. how easy or difficult was this piece for you? (circle) pretty easy not too hard pretty hard too hard discussion
7. how is communication used as a way to impact understanding, ideas, and actions?

the answer to your question is false can’t remember who he rode with but he rode with sombody

the answer is the petition of right.

explanation:

offer to of right, real demand of attesting a benefit against the english crown, the most remarkable point of reference being the petition of right of 1628, which parliament sent to charles i fussing of a movement of oversteps of law. the term also implied the framework (invalidated in 1947) by which a subject could sue the crown.   taking a gander at the frameworks used by maria amidu to make a standard in 2015 commending the 1628 petition of right, which was sent to charles i by the english parliament. at uniquely based law the crown, or the sovereign in his official cutoff, couldn't be sued in the ruler's courts. since the ruler was, really, the superior ace of those courts, coordinating value in them between his subjects, he was not subject to their ward. therefore it transformed into a preparation, at whatever point a subject's certified or individual property had come into the responsibility for ruler or his specialists without legitimate perfect, for the subject to engage the master in chamber for its recovery.

answer; code of federal regulations;