Question

which excerpt from tinker v. des moines shows how precedent helps support an argument?

a. \in the absence of a specific showing of constitutionally valid reasons to regulate their speech, students are entitled to freedom of expression of their views. as judge gewin, speaking for the fifth circuit, said, school officials cannot suppress expressions of feelings with which they do not wish to contend.\

b. \one does not need to be a prophet or the son of a prophet to know that, after the courts holding today, some students in iowa schools — and, indeed, in all schools — will be ready, able, and willing to defy their teachers on practically all orders.

c. \while the absence of obscene remarks or boisterous and loud disorder perhaps justifies the courts statement that the few armband students did not actually disrupt the classwork, i think the record overwhelmingly shows that the armbands did exactly what the elected school officials and principals foresaw they would.\

d. \cf. hammond p514 v. south carolina state college, 272 f.supp. 947 (d.c s.c.1967) (orderly protest meeting on state college campus); dickey v. alabama state board of education, 273 f supp.

Explanation:

To determine which excerpt shows how precedent supports an argument, we analyze each option:

• Option A: Cites Judge Gewin's statement (a precedent - like judicial opinion) to support the argument about students' freedom of expression, as it uses a prior judicial statement to back the claim.
• Option B: Discusses potential future student behavior after the court's holding, not precedent.
• Option C: Focuses on the disruption (or lack thereof) by armband students, not precedent.
• Option D: While it lists cases, the excerpt is cut off and doesn't clearly show how they support an argument in the context of Tinker v. Des Moines. Option A explicitly uses a judicial statement (precedent - related) to support its argument.

Answer:

A. "In the absence of a specific showing of constitutionally valid reasons to regulate their speech, students are entitled to freedom of expression of their views. As Judge Gewin, speaking for the Fifth Circuit, said, school officials cannot suppress 'expressions of feelings with which they do not wish to contend.'"