Question

1954: in hernandez v. texas, the supreme court rules that trying a defendant before a jury that deliberately excludes members of the defendants ethnic group violates the equal protection clause. 1996: in united states v. virginia, the supreme court rules that a military school must provide women with equal treatment by admitting them to the same program as men. 2015: in obergefell v. hodges, the supreme court rules that state laws forbidding same - sex marriage violate the equal protection clause. what do the events in this timeline suggest about how the supreme court has interpreted equal protection? a. it has interpreted equal protection as applying to different groups of people. b. it has interpreted equal protection as less important in the 21st century. c. it has interpreted equal protection as applying at the federal level, not at the state level. d. it has interpreted equal protection as not relevant to everyday citizens.

Explanation:

The cases involve different groups - ethnic minorities, women, and same - sex couples. The Supreme Court rules in each case that their equal protection rights are violated, showing equal protection applies to various groups.

Answer:

A. It has interpreted equal protection as applying to different groups of people.