Which of the following develops a logical argument about how
judicial restraint supports the Supreme Court’s Plessy v.
Ferguson decision? (1 point)
Judicial restraint supports the Plessy v. Ferguson decision
because the decision challenged the legislative intent of
the equal protections clause.
Judicial restraint supports the Plessy v. Ferguson decision
because the decision invalidated the separate but equal
doctrine.
Judicial restraint supports the Plessy v. Ferguson decision
because the decision challenged the actions of the
legislative and judicial branches.
Judicial restraint supports the Plessy v. Ferguson decision
because the Supreme Court did not challenge the actions
of the executive or legislative branches.
The correct answer is:
Judicial restraint supports the Plessy v. Ferguson decision because the decision challenged the actions of the legislative and judicial branches.
The correct answer is: Judicial restraint supports the Plessy v. Ferguson decision because the decision challenged the legislative intent of the equal protections clause.
To determine which of the given options develops a logical argument about how judicial restraint supports the Supreme Court's Plessy v. Ferguson decision, we need to analyze each option and identify the one that provides a valid explanation.
Option 1 states that judicial restraint supports the Plessy v. Ferguson decision because the decision challenged the legislative intent of the equal protections clause. This argument suggests that the judicial branch acted in a restrained manner by interpreting and upholding the separate but equal doctrine without questioning the legislative intent behind the equal protections clause.
Option 2 argues that judicial restraint supports the Plessy v. Ferguson decision because the decision invalidated the separate but equal doctrine. This argument suggests that in practicing judicial restraint, the Supreme Court did not overreach its authority but rather adhered to the existing legal framework by striking down the separate but equal doctrine.
Option 3 suggests that judicial restraint supports the Plessy v. Ferguson decision because the decision challenged the actions of the legislative and judicial branches. This argument implies that the Supreme Court acted within its restrained role by questioning and potentially limiting the powers of the legislative and judicial branches in relation to racial segregation.
Option 4 states that judicial restraint supports the Plessy v. Ferguson decision because the Supreme Court did not challenge the actions of the executive or legislative branches. This argument implies that the Supreme Court, in practicing restraint, did not interfere with the activities of the executive or legislative branches, thereby demonstrating respect for their respective powers.
Out of these options, Option 2 provides the most direct and logical explanation for how judicial restraint supports the Plessy v. Ferguson decision. By invalidating the separate but equal doctrine, the Supreme Court adhered to its restrained role by interpreting the existing laws without overstepping its authority. Therefore, the correct answer is Option 2.