When justice fortas refers to keyishian v. board of regents in the majority opinion for tinker v. des moines, which kind of reasoning is he using to support his argument?
a. pathos
b. judicial review
c. precedent
d. straw man

The answer to the question above is "C) Precedent" which is the kind of reasoning that Justice Fortas uses to support his argument when he refers to Keyishian v Board of Regents in the majority opinion for Tinker v Des Moines. The precedent is the kind of reasoning which a person uses by using legal aspect support. Abe Fortas is a man with a law background. Thus, precedent is the most likely kind of reasoning he uses.