⁉REALLY IMPORTANT⁉ Why did the NAACP (founded in 1909) adopt a legal strategy to fight segregation and disenfranchisement in the early decades of the 20th century? If you had been around at the time, would you have been optimistic or pessimistic about this strategy?​

Explanation:

In 1909, the NAACP commenced what has become its legacy of fighting legal battles to win social justice for African Americans and indeed, for all Americans. The most significant of these battles were fought and won under the leadership of Charles Hamilton Houston and his student and protégée, Thurgood Marshall.

After training the first generation of Civil Rights lawyers during his years as Dean of Howard University’s Law School, Houston was appointed in 1935 to be the first Special Counsel of the NAACP. Often referred to as the “Moses of the civil rights movement,” Houston was the architect and chief strategist of the NAACP’s legal campaign to end segregation.

In 1896, the U.S. Supreme Court endorsed segregation in Plessy v. Ferguson, which established the “separate but equal” principle. In a study commissioned by the NAACP in the 1930s, Nathan Margold found that under segregation, the facilities provided for blacks were always separate, but never equal to those maintained for whites. This, Margold argued, violated the equality aspect of Plessy’s “separate but equal” principle. Margold proposed a series of lawsuits that would challenge the system.

1) union forces launched a surprise attack.

2) more confederate troops arrived by train.

3) union forces retreated.

yes

explanation:

why