What was the ruling in the supreme court case of yick wo v. hopkins? the court ruled that chinese americans did not enjoy the same rights as native-born americans. the court ruled that chinese people born in the united states could be prohibited from entering the country. the court ruled that chinese students could be forced to attend segregated public schools. the court ruled that chinese immigrants were allowed to operate laundries?

N 1880, San Fransisco enacted an ordinance that required all laundry businesses had to be in buildings that were made of stone or brick. If they wanted to have a laundry that was in a wooden building, they needed to get permission from the board of supervisors. Due to challenges in other employment areas, Chinese immigrants often worked in or owned laundromats. In fact, 89% of San Fransisco's laundry businesses were operated by workers of Chinese descent.

The board of supervisors began granting whites permission to have laundry businesses in wooden buildings but didn't grant permission to Chinese immigrants. Those that violated this ordinance had to pay a fine. Yick Wo was an operator for 22 years in San Fransisco. He did not have a permit and refused to pay the fine. Wo was arrested and convicted. He then appealed his conviction, saying that the law was discriminating against him because of his race. The court ruled that he was still protected under the 14th Amendment and dismissed all charges. Looking at the background for this case and the ruling, the best answer choice would be that the court ruled that Chinese Americans were able to operate laundry facilities, just as native-born citizens could. 

What does this mean ? ?