Which of the following represents a legal difference between de facto and de jure segregation?

Responses

De facto segregation has been made illegal
De facto segregation has been made illegal

De jure segregation was overturned by the Plessy vs. Ferguson (1896) decision.
De jure segregation was overturned by the , Plessy vs. Ferguson , (1896) decision.

De jure segregation is legal.
De jure segregation is legal.

De jure segregation is supported by the US Constitution currently
De jure segregation is supported by the US Constitution currently

None of the above represent a legal difference between de facto and de jure segregation. The correct answer is:

De facto segregation refers to segregation that occurs without legal sanction or requirement, while de jure segregation refers to segregation that is enforced by law or government policy. Therefore, the legal difference between them is that de jure segregation is explicitly mandated by law or policy, while de facto segregation is not necessarily explicitly supported by law or policy but may still persist due to social and economic factors.

The legal difference between de facto and de jure segregation is that de jure segregation is supported by the US Constitution currently, while de facto segregation has been made illegal. De jure segregation was also overturned by the Plessy vs. Ferguson (1896) decision.