Analyzing a Seminal US Document
Read the passage from the opinion of the court in Brown v. Board of Education, written by Justice Warren. Segregation of white and colored children in public schools has a detrimental effect upon the colored children. The impact is greater when it has the sanction of the law, for the policy of separating the races is usually interpreted as denoting the inferiority of the negro group. A sense of inferiority affects the motivation of a child to learn. Segregation with the sanction of law, therefore, has a tendency to [retard] the educational and mental development of negro children and to deprive them of some of the benefits they would receive in a racial[ly] integrated school system. Whatever may have been the extent of psychological knowledge at the time of Plessy v. Ferguson, this finding is amply supported by modern authority. Any language in Plessy v. Ferguson contrary to this finding is rejected. We conclude that, in the field of public education, the doctrine of "separate but equal" has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. Therefore, we hold that the plaintiffs and others similarly situated for whom the actions have been brought are, by reason of the segregation complained of, deprived of the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. Which statement accurately summarizes the opinion of the court? The doctrine of "separate but equal" takes away African American citizens' rights to an equal public education. The doctrine of "separate but equal" shows that equal facilities provide equal opportunities. A sense of inferiority affects children's motivation to learn in a segregated system. Plessy v. Ferguson is based on dated psychological knowledge that should be rejected.
a
Read the passage from the opinion of the court in Dred Scott v. Sandford, written by Justice Taney. The question before us is, whether the class of persons described in the plea in abatement compose a portion of this people, and are constituent members of this sovereignty? We think they are not, and that they are not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word "citizens" in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States. On the contrary, they were at that time considered as a subordinate and inferior class of beings, who had been subjugated by the dominant race, and, whether emancipated or not, yet remained subject to their authority, and had no rights or privileges but such as those who held the power and the Government might choose to grant them. What type of logical error underlies the argument that African Americans were inferior? genetic fallacy begging the claim hasty generalization ad populum
a
Read the passage from the opinion of the court in Dred Scott v. Sandford, written by Justice Taney. The question before us is, whether the class of persons described in the plea in abatement compose a portion of this people, and are constituent members of this sovereignty? We think they are not, and that they are not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word "citizens" in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States. On the contrary, they were at that time considered as a subordinate and inferior class of beings, who had been subjugated by the dominant race, and, whether emancipated or not, yet remained subject to their authority, and had no rights or privileges but such as those who held the power and the Government might choose to grant them. Which statement best describes the fallacy in this passage? Justice Taney assumes that the writers of the Constitution would agree with him about citizenship. Justice Taney uses the argument that African Americans are not citizens to prove that they are not citizens. Justice Taney assumes that the other justices on the court would agree with him about citizenship. Justice Taney uses the argument that Dred Scott is an enslaved person to prove that he is not a citizen.
a
Read the passage from the opinion of the court in Brown v. Board of Education, written by Justice Warren. Segregation of white and colored children in public schools has a detrimental effect upon the colored children. The impact is greater when it has the sanction of the law, for the policy of separating the races is usually interpreted as denoting the inferiority of the negro group. A sense of inferiority affects the motivation of a child to learn. Segregation with the sanction of law, therefore, has a tendency to [retard] the educational and mental development of negro children and to deprive them of some of the benefits they would receive in a racial[ly] integrated school system. What reasons does Warren provide in this passage to support the claim? Select three options. The policy of segregation increases a sense of inferiority because it is a law. Racially integrated schools would have little impact on educational equality. Racially segregated schools take away educational benefits from African Americans. The policy of segregation makes African American children feel inferior. The policy of segregation has a negative effect on the education of white children.
a,c,d
What is the difference between a Supreme Court opinion and a Supreme Court dissent? An opinion is a Supreme Court decision that the majority of the judges disagree with, while a dissent agrees with the decision. An opinion is a Supreme Court decision that the majority of the judges agree with, while a dissent disagrees with the decision. An opinion is a Supreme Court summary of the case, while a dissent is the final decision made on the case. An opinion is a Supreme Court decision suggested by one of the judges, while a dissent summarizes previous decisions on similar issues.
b
Read the passage from the opinion of the court in Brown v. Board of Education, written by Justice Warren. We come then to the question presented: Does segregation of children in public schools solely on the basis of race, even though the physical facilities and other "tangible" factors may be equal, deprive the children of the minority group of equal educational opportunities? We believe that it does. . . . To separate them from others of similar age and qualifications solely because of their race generates a feeling of inferiority as to their status in the community that may affect their hearts and minds in a way unlikely ever to be undone. . . . Segregation of white and colored children in public schools has a detrimental effect upon the colored children. The impact is greater when it has the sanction of the law, for the policy of separating the races is usually interpreted as denoting the inferiority of the negro group. A sense of inferiority affects the motivation of a child to learn. Segregation with the sanction of law, therefore, has a tendency to [retard] the educational and mental development of negro children and to deprive them of some of the benefits they would receive in a racial[ly] integrated school system. Whatever may have been the extent of psychological knowledge at the time of Plessy v. Ferguson, this finding is amply supported by modern authority. Any language in Plessy v. Ferguson contrary to this finding is rejected. What reason does Warren give for believing that "separate but equal" does not give minority children equal educational opportunities? the findings of the court in Plessy v. Ferguson regarding equal educational facilities the reduced effects of segregation when it is sanctioned by federal regulations the findings that a sense of inferiority affects the motivation to learn the differences in educational and mental development in public and private schools
c
Read the passage from the opinion of the court in Dred Scott v. Sandford, written by Justice Taney. The question then arises, whether the provisions of the Constitution, in relation to the personal rights and privileges to which the citizen of a State should be entitled, embraced the negro African race, at that time in this country, or who might afterwards be imported, who had then or should afterwards be made free in any State; and to put it in the power of a single State to make him a citizen of the United States, and endue him with the full rights of citizenship in every other State without their consent? Does the Constitution of the United States act upon him whenever he shall be made free under the laws of a State, and raised there to the rank of a citizen, and immediately clothe him with all the privileges of a citizen in every other State, and in its own courts? The court thinks the affirmative of these propositions cannot be maintained. And if it cannot, the plaintiff in error could not be a citizen of the State of Missouri, within the meaning of the Constitution of the United States, and, consequently, was not entitled to sue in its courts. What claim does Justice Taney make in this passage? that Sanford has the right to enslave Scott that Scott has the right to be emancipated that Scott is not a citizen of Missouri that Sanford cannot sue because he is not a citizen
c
Read the passage from the opinion of the court in Dred Scott v. Sandford, written by Justice Taney. The question then arises, whether the provisions of the Constitution, in relation to the personal rights and privileges to which the citizen of a State should be entitled, embraced the negro African race, at that time in this country, or who might afterwards be imported, who had then or should afterwards be made free in any State; and to put it in the power of a single State to make him a citizen of the United States, and endue him with the full rights of citizenship in every other State without their consent? Does the Constitution of the United States act upon him whenever he shall be made free under the laws of a State, and raised there to the rank of a citizen, and immediately clothe him with all the privileges of a citizen in every other State, and in its own courts? Which statement could best be used as an effective counterclaim to this claim? States should decide who is free and who is not. A person who is free in one state cannot be a citizen. Taney cannot deny Scott citizenship because it is a federal right. Other states should have a say over one state's decision.
c
Read the passage from the opinion of the court in Dred Scott v. Sandford, written by Justice Taney. The question before us is, whether the class of persons described in the plea in abatement compose a portion of this people, and are constituent members of this sovereignty? We think they are not, and that they are not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word "citizens" in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States. On the contrary, they were at that time considered as a subordinate and inferior class of beings, who had been subjugated by the dominant race, and, whether emancipated or not, yet remained subject to their authority, and had no rights or privileges but such as those who held the power and the Government might choose to grant them. What fallacy can you identify and discredit to develop a counterclaim to this claim? the idea that citizens have rights and privileges that are guaranteed in the Constitution the idea that noncitizens cannot claim certain rights and privileges in the Constitution the idea that the plaintiff considers himself a citizen and therefore has rights and privileges the idea that African American people are inferior based on perceptions from an earlier time
d
What is anecdotal evidence? a statistic or piece of data a comparison or analogy a professional or expert's testimony a personal story or historical example
d
