Answer: it depends what you are talking about what documents are you trying to argue. But here is my shot in trying to help you make your argument clear that you are for the topic then use that information to write an argument against that topic.
Explanation: meaning if you are trying to argue let’s say the Indian removal act you would write why you are for it and then write why you are against it.
A because last week we learned this. You can not take away fair rights from people
The argument made by Holmes was that the protection of free speech is important but there are some cases in which personal expression is irresponsible and can be banned.
<h3>What is the case of Schenck v. United States?</h3>
The Court determined that a state could constitutionally limit an individual's free speech rights under the First Amendment.
Hence, the Justice of the state made an argument that the the protection of free speech is important but there are some cases in which personal expression is irresponsible and can be banned.
Therefore, the Option C is correct.
Read more about Schenck v. United States
<em>brainly.com/question/2764676</em>
#SPJ1
Answer: 1. France emerged from World War II to face a series of new problems.
2. After a short period of provisional government initially led by General Charles de Gaulle, a new constitution (October 13, 1946)
3. established the Fourth Republic under a parliamentary form of government, controlled by a series of coalitions.
Explanation:
