Which of the following develops a logical argument about how judicial restraint supports the Supreme Court’s Plessy v. Ferguson decision?(1 point)
Responses
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 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 decision challenged the actions of the legislative and judicial branches.
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 challenged the legislative intent of the equal protections clause.
Judicial restraint supports the Plessy v. Ferguson decision because the Supreme Court did not challenge the actions of the executive or legislative 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 logical argument that supports the Supreme Court's Plessy v. Ferguson decision is the following: "Judicial restraint supports the Plessy v. Ferguson decision because the Supreme Court did not challenge the actions of the executive or legislative branches."
To determine which of the given responses develops a logical argument about how judicial restraint supports the Supreme Court's Plessy v. Ferguson decision, we need to understand the concept of judicial restraint and how it relates to this specific case.
Judicial restraint is a legal philosophy that suggests judges should interpret the law strictly and limit their own power by deferring to the decisions of elected officials and the democratic process. It emphasizes the importance of adhering to the original intent of the Constitution and not making broad interpretations or significant policy changes.
In the Plessy v. Ferguson decision, the Supreme Court ruled in 1896 that racial segregation was constitutional under the "separate but equal" doctrine. This decision essentially upheld racial segregation and allowed states to continue implementing discriminatory practices.
Now let's evaluate each response to see which one presents a logical argument about how judicial restraint supports the Plessy v. Ferguson decision.
Response 1: "Judicial restraint supports the Plessy v. Ferguson decision because the decision invalidated the separate but equal doctrine."
This response is incorrect because it states that the Plessy v. Ferguson decision invalidated the "separate but equal" doctrine, which is incorrect. The decision actually upheld the doctrine, allowing for racial segregation. Therefore, this response does not present a logical argument about how judicial restraint supports the decision.
Response 2: "Judicial restraint supports the Plessy v. Ferguson decision because the decision challenged the actions of the legislative and judicial branches."
This response is also incorrect because it suggests that the Plessy v. Ferguson decision challenged the actions of the legislative and judicial branches. However, the decision actually upheld the actions of the legislative branches that implemented racial segregation laws. Therefore, this response does not provide a logical argument about how judicial restraint supports the decision.
Response 3: "Judicial restraint supports the Plessy v. Ferguson decision because the decision challenged the legislative intent of the equal protections clause."
This response is incorrect as well because it suggests that the Plessy v. Ferguson decision challenged the legislative intent of the equal protections clause, which is not accurate. The decision upheld racial segregation, which went against the purpose and intent of the equal protections clause. Therefore, this response does not present a logical argument about how judicial restraint supports the decision.
Response 4: "Judicial restraint supports the Plessy v. Ferguson decision because the Supreme Court did not challenge the actions of the executive or legislative branches."
This response is the correct answer. It presents a logical argument about how judicial restraint supports the Plessy v. Ferguson decision by stating that the Supreme Court, through judicial restraint, did not challenge the actions of the executive or legislative branches. This argument aligns with the philosophy of judicial restraint, which emphasizes deference to the decisions and actions of other branches of government.
Therefore, the correct response is the fourth one: "Judicial restraint supports the Plessy v. Ferguson decision because the Supreme Court did not challenge the actions of the executive or legislative branches."