This is a matter of opinion.
If you think yes, you could argue that internment was a great PR move and/or that it protected the Japanese living in America from negative press
If you argue no (which I would) then you could argue that it was unconstitutional and/or had no strategic importance to the war itself.
The historians could be wrong without proper proof to back up their so-called "facts". Therefore, they would need to study and know what they're talking about, before presenting their statements as facts.
One of the most revealing parts of the text is this one:
<em>The laws were designed to correct every deficiency revealed in the Lower East Side fire: for example, it required automatic sprinklers in high-rise buildings. Fire drills became mandatory in large shops. Factory doors had to be unlocked and had to swing outward.</em>
It's correct to assume that, even thought it was a tragedy, the Shirtwaist Factory Fire was the reason behind a series of measures that were adopted to prevent new disasters.
The legacy left behind after what happened is incalculable and the amount of deaths avoided after this specific disaster is very substantial considering the new safety procedures created to avoid something like that to ever happen again.
The correct answer is:
A. The Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire was the disaster that brought to attention the need for improved working conditions in America
