Kenneth Thompson has been the mayor for eight years, and it is time for change. His policies for this city have been harmful and greedy. He approved the sale of 100 acres of natural land to developers. Now, our town's greenbelt will be replaced with stores and houses.
Also, right after Thompson was elected, the high school's rating dropped because the students got lower state test scores. Those scores have not gone back up in the past eight years. He is hurting our schools and students.
Thompson has begun to make people in this city angry, including me. He is up for re-election this year, but this year the citizens of this city should kick him out of office.
Which idea from the passage is an error in logic?

A.
Thompson sold land to developers.
B.
Thompson caused lower test scores.
C.
Thompson has been mayor for eight years.
D.
Thompson is trying to get re-elected.

Read the passage from the opinion of the court in dred scott v. sandford, written by justice taney. the question then arises, whether the provisions of the constitution, in relation to the personal rights and privileges to which the citizen of a state should be entitled, embraced the negro african race, at that time in this country, or who might afterwards be imported, who had then or should afterwards be made free in any state; and to put it in the power of a single state to make him a citizen of the united states, and endue him with the full rights of citizenship in every other state without their consent? does the constitution of the united states act upon him whenever he shall be made free under the laws of a state, and raised there to the rank of a citizen, and immediately clothe him with all the privileges of a citizen in every other state, and in its own courts? the court thinks the affirmative of these propositions cannot be maintained. and if it cannot, the plaintiff in error could not be a citizen of the state of missouri, within the meaning of the constitution of the united states, and, consequently, was not entitled to sue in its courts. what claim does justice taney make in this passage? that sanford has the right to enslave scott that scott has the right to be emancipated that scott is not a citizen of missouri that sanford cannot sue because he is not a citizen