Question

question 2
how did the structure of mary beth’s 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
which sentence best explains the reasoning behind mary beth’s argument?
up to stay out of trouble.
seconds ago

Explanation:

To determine the answer, we analyze each option for how an effective legal argument (or supporting argument in court) is structured. A strong argument in a legal or persuasive context typically uses a clear claim, provides evidence, uses reasoning to connect them, and has a strong conclusion. Option A (ignoring the Constitution) is illogical for a legal team. Option B (relying on emotion for students, not relevant to a legal court argument structure). Option D (adding opinions without proof) is weak. Option C describes a sound argument structure with claim, evidence, reasoning, conclusion, which is how a legal team would build a strong case.

Answer:

C. They used a clear claim, evidence, reasoning, and a strong conclusion.