Which of the following develops a logical argument about how judicial restraint supports the Supreme Court’s Plessy v. Ferguson decision?(1 point)

Question

Responses

Judicial restraint supports the Plessy v. Ferguson decision because the Supreme Court did not challenge the actions of the executive or legislative branches.
Judicial restraint supports the Plessy v. Ferguson decision because the Supreme Court did not challenge the actions of the executive or legislative branches.

Judicial restraint supports the Plessy v. Ferguson decision because the decision challenged the legislative intent of the equal protections clause.
Judicial restraint supports the Plessy v. Ferguson decision because the decision challenged the legislative intent of the equal protections clause.

Judicial restraint supports the Plessy v. Ferguson decision because the decision invalidated the separate but equal doctrine.
Judicial restraint supports the Plessy v. Ferguson decision because the decision invalidated the separate but equal doctrine.

Judicial restraint supports the Plessy v. Ferguson decision because the decision challenged the actions of the legislative and judicial branches.
Judicial restraint supports the Plessy v. Ferguson decision because the decision challenged the actions of the legislative and judicial branches.

Answer 1

The appropriate response that develops a logical argument about how judicial restraint supports the Supreme Court’s Plessy v. Ferguson decision is:

Judicial restraint supports the Plessy v. Ferguson decision because the Supreme Court did not challenge the actions of the executive or legislative branches.

This statement reflects the principle of judicial restraint, which emphasizes that courts should defer to the actions of other branches of government unless there is a clear violation of the Constitution. In the case of Plessy v. Ferguson, the Supreme Court upheld state laws that enforced racial segregation and did not intervene against the legislative decisions that created such laws, illustrating judicial restraint.