How does paragraph 7 contribute to the ideas in the text? A. It describes a different time in history when people protested.
B. It describes a different form or protest where the protestors got violent.
C. It describes how protestors reacted when they were arrested at the lunch
counters.
D. It describes how a different protest emerged that was inspired by the success of the sit-in movement.

a

Explanation:

yes

explanation:

the fighting words doctrine, in united states constitutional law, is a limitation to freedom of speech as protected by the first amendment to the united states constitution. in 1942, the u.s. supreme court established the doctrine by a 9–0 decision in chaplinsky v. new hampshire.

it was certainly a debatable decision, mainly because it was based primarily on political - and not on legal or social - views. since the congress at that time was led by members of the republican party, and the territory that the tribes wanted to turn into an exclusively indian state was predominantly democratic, the proposal (as expressed in the constitution) did not succeed, but the constitution itself proved to be of crucial importance in the creation of the state of oklahoma, and, most importantly, it guaranteed the involvement of representatives of the indian tribes in the government of the future joint state.  

as a member of congress, i would have voted to ratify the constitution, or at least to have it tabled. ignoring it was an interested and partial decision.