Pagina de inicio
/
Derecho
/
Which sentence BEST explains how Tinkerv. Des Moines affected the U.S Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit's ruling on Lew's case? Even though the court mentioned the Tinkercase the court did not feel it could be invoked in Lew's case about off-campus speech. Because the court did not want to dismiss the Tinker standard, the court invoked it in the Levy case and used it to support Levy's position Even though the court applied the Tinker standard to Levy's case, the court said Lew's speech was not disruptive enough. Because the court did not apply the Tinker standard to the Levy case, the court ruled against Levy and in favor of the school's disciplinary action.

Problemas

Which sentence BEST explains how Tinkerv. Des Moines affected the U.S Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit's ruling on Lew's case? Even though the court mentioned the Tinkercase the court did not feel it could be invoked in Lew's case about off-campus speech. Because the court did not want to dismiss the Tinker standard, the court invoked it in the Levy case and used it to support Levy's position Even though the court applied the Tinker standard to Levy's case, the court said Lew's speech was not disruptive enough. Because the court did not apply the Tinker standard to the Levy case, the court ruled against Levy and in favor of the school's disciplinary action.

Which sentence BEST explains how Tinkerv. Des Moines affected the U.S Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit's ruling on Lew's case? Even though the court mentioned the Tinkercase the court did not feel it could be invoked in Lew's case about off-campus speech. Because the court did not want to dismiss the Tinker standard, the court invoked it in the Levy case and used it to support Levy's position Even though the court applied the Tinker standard to Levy's case, the court said Lew's speech was not disruptive enough. Because the court did not apply the Tinker standard to the Levy case, the court ruled against Levy and in favor of the school's disciplinary action.

Solución

avatar
Benjamínélite · Tutor durante 8 años
expert verifiedVerificación de expertos
4.6 (226 votos)

Responder

The sentence that BEST explains how Tinker v. Des Moines affected the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit's ruling on Lew's case is:<br /><br />"Even though the court applied the Tinker standard to Levy's case, the court said Lew's speech was not disruptive enough."<br /><br />This sentence accurately reflects the court's application of the Tinker standard, which evaluates whether a student's speech or expression causes a substantial disruption to the school environment. In this case, the court found that Lew's speech did not meet this criterion, and therefore, it did not qualify for protection under the First Amendment.
Haz clic para calificar: