Which excerpt from Tinker v. Des Moines shows how precedent helps
support an argument?
A. "Under our Constitution, free speech is not a right that is given only
to be so circumscribed that it exists in principle, but not in fact.
Freedom of expression would not truly exist if the right could be
exercised only in an area that a benevolent government has
provided as a safe haven for crackpots."
B. "I, for one, am not fully persuaded that school pupils are wise
enough, even with this Court's expert help from Washington, to run
the 23,390 public school systems [n4] in our 50 States."
C. "As we shall discuss, the wearing of armbands in the
circumstances of this case was entirely divorced from actually or
potentially disruptive conduct by those participating in it. It was
closely akin to 'pure speech' which, we have repeatedly held, is
entitled to comprehensive protection under the First Amendment.
Cf. Cox v. Louisiana, 379 U.S. 536, 555 (1965); Adderley v. Florida,
385 U.S. 39 (1966)."
OD. "While the absence of obscene remarks or boisterous and loud
disorder perhaps justifies the Court's statement that the
few
armband students did not actually 'disrupt' the classwork, I think



Answer :

Final answer:

Precedent in Tinker v. Des Moines is shown through citations of previous cases like Cox v. Louisiana and Adderley v. Florida to support the argument about protecting 'pure speech' under the First Amendment.


Explanation:

Precedent in legal terms refers to past decisions that can influence current cases. In the context of Tinker v. Des Moines, the excerpt that shows how precedent supports an argument is option C. This excerpt references previous cases like Cox v. Louisiana and Adderley v. Florida to support the argument about the protection of 'pure speech' under the First Amendment.


Learn more about Tinker v. Des Moines here:

https://brainly.com/question/31697379