A federal court hears a case regarding the arrest of protesters at a rally. The protesters argue that they have the right to protest government actions, while the prosecution argues that the protesters presented a danger to the public, warranting their arrests.

How is the court most likely to rule in this case?

The court will likely rule in favor of the protestors, citing the 14th Amendment right of due process.
The court will likely rule in favor of the protestors, citing the First Amendment right of peaceable assembly.
The court will likely rule in favor of the prosecution, citing precedent allowing restrictions on free speech to ensure public safety.
The court will likely rule in favor of the prosecution, citing the 10th Amendment right of states to pass laws not expressly stated in the Constitution.

B is what I'm going to answer, but it might be C.

Explanation:

It's not A because that's not relevant to this case and it's not D because that's irrelevant too, so it has to be B or C. The reason I think it's B (even though in modern times I know it would be C) is because the only reason given by the officers is that they thought the act of protesting itself presented a danger to the public, not that they did anything violent or illegal. These people can't be arrested as long as the individuals in question were peaceful and did not enourage violence, even if other protesters were violent. I think the test wants us to remember that people are always allowed to protest as long as its peaceful.

Sorry I wasn't more helpful, but was looking for the answer myself and I was really annoyed by the one "answer" the other guy gave that tricked me into coming here and leaving unhelped.

personal injury protection coverage covers your lost income if you are injured in a collision and also includes medical expenses regardless of who's at fault