Question

subject
supreme court ruled in favor of mary beth tinker?
her protest broke the dress code and school guidelines.
her protest followed school rules and was protected by free speech rights.
her protest interrupted class and caused school distractions.
her protest used slogans that offended other students.
question 2
5 points
how did the structure of mary beths argument help her legal team in court?
they ignored the constitution to avoid sounding too political.
they relied on emotion to convince the justices to support students.
they used a clear claim, evidence, reasoning, and a strong conclusion.
they added strong opinions without providing examples or proof.
question 3
5 points
which sentence best explains the reasoning behind mary beths argument?
students should have the same peaceful protest rights as adults.
students should protest school lunch policies and rules.
students should avoid speaking up to stay out of trouble.

Explanation:

Question 1

The Tinker v. Des Moines case was about students' free speech rights. The Supreme Court ruled that Mary Beth Tinker's protest (wearing armbands) was protected by the First Amendment as it followed school rules and was a form of symbolic speech. The other options are incorrect: her protest didn't break dress code/guidelines in a way that wasn't protected, didn't interrupt class/distract, and didn't use offensive slogans.

A strong legal argument in court typically uses a clear claim, relevant evidence, logical reasoning, and a strong conclusion. Ignoring the Constitution, relying only on emotion, or using opinions without proof are not effective legal argument structures. So the option with clear claim, evidence, reasoning, and conclusion is correct.

Mary Beth's argument (and the Tinker case) was about students having the right to peaceful protest, similar to adults' First Amendment rights. The other options: protesting lunch policies isn't related to the Tinker case, and avoiding speaking up goes against the case's premise of free speech for students.

Answer:

B. Her protest followed school rules and was protected by free speech rights.

Question 2