Question

6000610
of the following features, if added to trumans speech, would most enhance the audience’s
standing of the historical context of civil rights in 1947?
a. a glossary defining legal terms used in the speech
b. a chart comparing civil rights laws before and after 1947
c. a caption explaining truman’s background
d. an appendix listing naacp members in attendance

1. truman argues that the federal government must take the lead in protecting civil rights. how would a

critic who believes in states rights most likely respond to this argument?
a. by agreeing that federal oversight ensures consistency across states
b. by emphasizing the need for international cooperation on civil rights
c. by supporting truman’s call for a national civil rights commission
d. by arguing that civil rights enforcement should be left to individual states

truman references the constitution and the bill of rights to support his argument for civil rights.
how might another speaker use the same documents to argue against federal involvement in civil
rights enforcement?
a. by interpreting them as limiting federal power and protecting state sovereignty
b. by claiming those documents guarantee freedom of speech
c. by using them to support international human rights efforts
d. by arguing they are outdated and need revision

Explanation:

Question 3 (assuming the first question is numbered 3)

To enhance understanding of the historical context of civil rights in 1947, we analyze each option:

• Option A: A glossary of legal terms helps with terminology but not historical context.
• Option B: A chart comparing civil rights laws before and after 1947 shows the evolution of laws, directly relating to historical context.
• Option C: Truman's background is not the main focus of civil rights historical context.
• Option D: Listing NAACP members in attendance is not relevant to the historical context of civil rights laws or events.

A critic who believes in states' rights would oppose federal overreach. Truman wants federal leadership in civil rights.

• Option A: Agreeing with federal oversight goes against states' rights.
• Option B: International cooperation is irrelevant to states' rights vs. federal power.
• Option C: Supporting Truman's call also goes against states' rights.
• Option D: Arguing civil rights enforcement should be left to states aligns with states' rights ideology.

To argue against federal involvement, a speaker would interpret the Constitution and Bill of Rights as limiting federal power.

• Option A: Interpreting them as limiting federal power and protecting state sovereignty matches the goal of opposing federal involvement.
• Option B: Freedom of speech is not related to federal vs. state power over civil rights enforcement.
• Option C: International human rights efforts are irrelevant here.
• Option D: Arguing documents are outdated is not about federal involvement.

Answer:

B. A chart comparing civil rights laws before and after 1947

Question 4