Question

Read the excerpt from the state constitution of Arkansas, which was adopted in 1874.

No person who may hereafter fight a duel, assist in the same as second, or send, accept, or knowingly carry a challenge therefor, shall hold any office in the state, for a period of ten years...
-Arkansas state constitution, Article 19, Section

How would a rule like this most likely be interpreted by someone interested in state constitutional reform?
A. This rule would be seen as a fundamental law of lasting importance that should not be changed.
B. This rule would be seen as a statutory law that the state legislature should pass but not put in the constitution.
C. This rule would be seen as a miscellaneous provision that no longer has any practical effect and does not need to be in the constitution. ****
D. This rule would be seen as a preamble that has no legal force and could remain in the document to help explain the constitution's purpose.

I think it is C

Answer 1

I agree with you, unless you can think of any kind of violence these days that has the same intent as a duel used to.