Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 29 May 2017, 09:11

# Today:

Memorial Day - GMAT Club Tests are Open without Subscription

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Status: Still Struggling
Joined: 03 Nov 2010
Posts: 137
Location: India
GMAT Date: 10-15-2011
GPA: 3.71
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 93 [4] , given: 8

In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jun 2011, 21:38
4
KUDOS
15
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

45% (medium)

Question Stats:

52% (02:07) correct 48% (01:05) wrong based on 564 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia as unconstitutional, and ruling that it was a form of price-fixing, as such, an abridgment of the right of contract.

A) the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia as unconstitutional, and
B) the Supreme Court declared as unconstitutional a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia, and
C) the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia,
D) a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia was declared nconstitutional by the Supreme Court ,
E) when the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia as unconstitutional,
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

Knewton Free Test 10/03 - 710 (49/37)
Princeton Free Test 10/08 - 610 (44/31)
Kaplan Test 1- 10/10 - 630
Veritas Prep- 10/11 - 630 (42/37)
MGMAT 1 - 10/12 - 680 (45/34)

If you have any questions
New!
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2022
Followers: 2221

Kudos [?]: 7767 [7] , given: 291

Re: In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Nov 2012, 07:56
7
KUDOS
Expert's post
7
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Hi Sachin,

When a verb-ing modifier is preceded by a comma, it always modifies the entire preceding clause. The verb-ing modifier denotes an action and this action must make sense with the subject of the preceding clause. Let’s take a set of simple examples to understand this usage:

a. Ria maintains a diary, writing her day-to-day accounts.

Here, “writing” is preceded by a comma. Hence, it modifies the entire preceding clause. This modifier explains HOW Ria maintains a diary. She does so by writing her daily accounts. The verb-ing modifier “writing” denotes an action. This action makes sense with the subject of the clause “Ria” because “Ria” does the action of writing.

b. A diary is maintained by Ria, writing her day-to-day accounts.

By writing this sentence in passive voice, we change the subject of the preceding clause that the comma + verb-ing modifier “writing” modifies. This modification does not make sense because the action denoted by “writing” does not make sense with the subject of the clause “A diary”. “A diary” does not perform the action of “writing”. Ria did that action. Hence, this sentence is incorrect.

Now study choices C (correct choice) and D of the official question:

Choice C: In 1923, the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia, ruling that it was a form of price-fixing, as such, an abridgment of the right of contract.

Choice D: In 1923, a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, ruling that it was a form of price-fixing, as such, an abridgment of the right of contract.

In choice C, “ruling” makes sense with “the Supreme Court” because the SC did the action of ruling and hence the modification is correct.

In choice D, the subject is “a minimum wage”. This subject does not make sense with the action denoted by “ruling”. Hence, this modification is incorrect.

Usage of “Verb-ing” Modifiers has been explained in detail in our concept named “Modifiers – Verb-ing”. This concept is listed under Level 1 Preview Concepts that are free for everyone. Just go to e-gmat.com, register for free and learn the concept. There are quizzes for your practice as well.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
_________________

| '4 out of Top 5' Instructors on gmatclub | 70 point improvement guarantee | www.e-gmat.com

Retired Moderator
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 3863
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Followers: 823

Kudos [?]: 6343 [4] , given: 324

In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Nov 2012, 03:05
4
KUDOS
5
This post was
BOOKMARKED
In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia as unconstitutional, and ruling that it was a form of price-fixing, as such, an abridgment of the right of contract.

A) The Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia as unconstitutional, and --- and ruling is not parallel to declared

B) the Supreme Court declared as unconstitutional a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia, and—same as in A

C) the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia, ---- a simple sentence, with the Supreme court as the subject , declared as the main verb and ruling as the present participial modifier correct choices

D) a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court,-------- Not withstanding that the clause is in passive voice, the present participial modifier – ruling -- modifies the clause starting with ---a minimum wage -- as if it is the minimum wage that invoked the ruling.

E) when the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia as unconstitutional,--- The main clasue is missing
_________________

“Better than a thousand days of diligent study is one day with a great teacher” – a Japanese proverb.
9884544509

Last edited by daagh on 23 Mar 2017, 03:16, edited 2 times in total.
Retired Moderator
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 3863
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Followers: 823

Kudos [?]: 6343 [2] , given: 324

Re: In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Nov 2012, 22:39
2
KUDOS
The gist of the passive voice sentence in D is: A minimum wage was declared illegal by the Supreme court. This act must have been done by
A body of people such as Supreme court or the Legal Dept and so on. The declaration could not have been made by the minimum wage. For a logical predication, it requires SC to act as the doer of the action. That is the reason it requires a clause which is active rather than passive.

This is my opinion.
_________________

“Better than a thousand days of diligent study is one day with a great teacher” – a Japanese proverb.
9884544509

Director
Status: Gonna rock this time!!!
Joined: 22 Jul 2012
Posts: 530
Location: India
GMAT 1: 640 Q43 V34
GMAT 2: 630 Q47 V29
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 66 [1] , given: 562

Re: In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Nov 2012, 01:40
1
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
krishnasty wrote:
In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia as unconstitutional, and ruling that it was a form of price-fixing, as such, an abridgment of the right of contract.

A) the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia as unconstitutional, and
B) the Supreme Court declared as unconstitutional a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia, and
C) the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia,
D) a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia was declared nconstitutional by the Supreme Court ,
E) when the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia as unconstitutional,

Could somebody please explain why D is wrong?
_________________

hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things. And no good thing ever dies.

Who says you need a 700 ?Check this out : http://gmatclub.com/forum/who-says-you-need-a-149706.html#p1201595

My GMAT Journey : http://gmatclub.com/forum/end-of-my-gmat-journey-149328.html#p1197992

Retired Moderator
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 3863
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Followers: 823

Kudos [?]: 6343 [1] , given: 324

Re: In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Nov 2012, 10:15
1
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
@ Sachin,

You mean choice D I suppose, but your reasoning does not apply in modifiers. . You see, the modifier is separated from the previous noun --Supreme Court -- by a comma. When a present participle is acting as an adverbial modifier, then it modifies the entire previous clause rather than the previous noun or the closest noun.

What you say applies to relative pronouns such as which, that, who, when, where etc, which are mostly supposed to refer to the touching nouns or the closes nouns {of course, except in some special contexts)
_________________

“Better than a thousand days of diligent study is one day with a great teacher” – a Japanese proverb.
9884544509

Director
Status: Gonna rock this time!!!
Joined: 22 Jul 2012
Posts: 530
Location: India
GMAT 1: 640 Q43 V34
GMAT 2: 630 Q47 V29
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 66 [0], given: 562

Re: In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Nov 2012, 07:38
daagh wrote:

D) a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court-------- Not withstanding that the clause is in passive voice, the present participial modifier – ruling -- modifies the clause starting with ---a minimum wage -- as if it is the minimum wage that invoked the ruling.

thanks but I have the following doubt:

the present participial modifier – ruling is close to the supreme court and hence it must modify supreme court right? Why does it look like it is modifying the minimum wage
_________________

hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things. And no good thing ever dies.

Who says you need a 700 ?Check this out : http://gmatclub.com/forum/who-says-you-need-a-149706.html#p1201595

My GMAT Journey : http://gmatclub.com/forum/end-of-my-gmat-journey-149328.html#p1197992

Director
Status: Gonna rock this time!!!
Joined: 22 Jul 2012
Posts: 530
Location: India
GMAT 1: 640 Q43 V34
GMAT 2: 630 Q47 V29
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 66 [0], given: 562

Re: In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Nov 2012, 19:17
daagh wrote:
@ Sachin,

You mean choice D I suppose, but your reasoning does not apply in modifiers. . You see, the modifier is separated from the previous noun --Supreme Court -- by a comma. When a present participle is acting as an adverbial modifier, then it modifies the entire previous clause rather than the previous noun or the closest noun.

What you say applies to relative pronouns such as which, that, who, when, where etc, which are mostly supposed to refer to the touching nouns or the closes nouns {of course, except in some special contexts)

Well , in that case, the adverbial modifier ' ruling ' must modify the previous clause in D as well; Why does it need the clause to be in active for the adverbial modifier to modify the previous clause?
_________________

hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things. And no good thing ever dies.

Who says you need a 700 ?Check this out : http://gmatclub.com/forum/who-says-you-need-a-149706.html#p1201595

My GMAT Journey : http://gmatclub.com/forum/end-of-my-gmat-journey-149328.html#p1197992

Director
Status: Gonna rock this time!!!
Joined: 22 Jul 2012
Posts: 530
Location: India
GMAT 1: 640 Q43 V34
GMAT 2: 630 Q47 V29
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 66 [0], given: 562

Re: In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Nov 2012, 08:28
daagh wrote:
The gist of the passive voice sentence in D is: A minimum wage was declared illegal by the Supreme court. This act must have been done by
A body of people such as Supreme court or the Legal Dept and so on. The declaration could not have been made by the minimum wage. For a logical predication, it requires SC to act as the doer of the action. That is the reason it requires a clause which is active rather than passive.

This is my opinion.

_________________

hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things. And no good thing ever dies.

Who says you need a 700 ?Check this out : http://gmatclub.com/forum/who-says-you-need-a-149706.html#p1201595

My GMAT Journey : http://gmatclub.com/forum/end-of-my-gmat-journey-149328.html#p1197992

Manager
Joined: 20 Aug 2012
Posts: 69
Schools: Jones '15
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 5

Re: In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Nov 2012, 13:43
In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia as unconstitutional, and ruling that it was a form of price-fixing, as such, an abridgment of the right of contract.

A) the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia as unconstitutional, and declared and ruling not parallel
B) the Supreme Court declared as unconstitutional a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia, and declared and ruling not parallel
C) the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia, Correct
D) a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia was declared nconstitutional by the Supreme Court , passive voice.
E) when the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia as unconstitutional, ruling modifes what?
Director
Status: Gonna rock this time!!!
Joined: 22 Jul 2012
Posts: 530
Location: India
GMAT 1: 640 Q43 V34
GMAT 2: 630 Q47 V29
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 66 [0], given: 562

Re: In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Nov 2012, 19:27
nanishora wrote:
In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia as unconstitutional, and ruling that it was a form of price-fixing, as such, an abridgment of the right of contract.

A) the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia as unconstitutional, and declared and ruling not parallel
B) the Supreme Court declared as unconstitutional a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia, and declared and ruling not parallel
C) the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia, Correct
D) a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia was declared nconstitutional by the Supreme Court , passive voice.
E) when the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia as unconstitutional, ruling modifes what?

I believe D can't be eliminated only on the basis of it having a passive voice..
_________________

hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things. And no good thing ever dies.

Who says you need a 700 ?Check this out : http://gmatclub.com/forum/who-says-you-need-a-149706.html#p1201595

My GMAT Journey : http://gmatclub.com/forum/end-of-my-gmat-journey-149328.html#p1197992

Director
Status: Gonna rock this time!!!
Joined: 22 Jul 2012
Posts: 530
Location: India
GMAT 1: 640 Q43 V34
GMAT 2: 630 Q47 V29
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 66 [0], given: 562

Re: In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Nov 2012, 09:24
egmat wrote:
Hi Sachin,

When a verb-ing modifier is preceded by a comma, it always modifies the entire preceding clause. The verb-ing modifier denotes an action and this action must make sense with the subject of the preceding clause. Let’s take a set of simple examples to understand this usage:

a. Ria maintains a diary, writing her day-to-day accounts.

Here, “writing” is preceded by a comma. Hence, it modifies the entire preceding clause. This modifier explains HOW Ria maintains a diary. She does so by writing her daily accounts. The verb-ing modifier “writing” denotes an action. This action makes sense with the subject of the clause “Ria” because “Ria” does the action of writing.

b. A diary is maintained by Ria, writing her day-to-day accounts.

By writing this sentence in passive voice, we change the subject of the preceding clause that the comma + verb-ing modifier “writing” modifies. This modification does not make sense because the action denoted by “writing” does not make sense with the subject of the clause “A diary”. “A diary” does not perform the action of “writing”. Ria did that action. Hence, this sentence is incorrect.

Now study choices C (correct choice) and D of the official question:

Choice C: In 1923, the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia, ruling that it was a form of price-fixing, as such, an abridgment of the right of contract.

Choice D: In 1923, a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, ruling that it was a form of price-fixing, as such, an abridgment of the right of contract.

In choice C, “ruling” makes sense with “the Supreme Court” because the SC did the action of ruling and hence the modification is correct.

In choice D, the subject is “a minimum wage”. This subject does not make sense with the action denoted by “ruling”. Hence, this modification is incorrect.

Usage of “Verb-ing” Modifiers has been explained in detail in our concept named “Modifiers – Verb-ing”. This concept is listed under Level 1 Preview Concepts that are free for everyone. Just go to e-gmat.com, register for free and learn the concept. There are quizzes for your practice as well.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.

As always, you rock!! Thanks for the lucid explanation!!
_________________

hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things. And no good thing ever dies.

Who says you need a 700 ?Check this out : http://gmatclub.com/forum/who-says-you-need-a-149706.html#p1201595

My GMAT Journey : http://gmatclub.com/forum/end-of-my-gmat-journey-149328.html#p1197992

Manager
Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Posts: 91
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 43

Re: In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Apr 2013, 05:29
Can we please get an expert reply on why D is wrong. Passive voice is not grammatically wrong and using -ing in ruling does not cause modification errors
Manager
Joined: 21 Jun 2011
Posts: 81
Location: United States
Concentration: Accounting, Finance
WE: Accounting (Accounting)
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 40 [0], given: 13

Re: In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 May 2013, 00:39
egmat wrote:
Hi Sachin,

When a verb-ing modifier is preceded by a comma, it always modifies the entire preceding clause. The verb-ing modifier denotes an action and this action must make sense with the subject of the preceding clause. Let’s take a set of simple examples to understand this usage:

a. Ria maintains a diary, writing her day-to-day accounts.

Here, “writing” is preceded by a comma. Hence, it modifies the entire preceding clause. This modifier explains HOW Ria maintains a diary. She does so by writing her daily accounts. The verb-ing modifier “writing” denotes an action. This action makes sense with the subject of the clause “Ria” because “Ria” does the action of writing.

b. A diary is maintained by Ria, writing her day-to-day accounts.

By writing this sentence in passive voice, we change the subject of the preceding clause that the comma + verb-ing modifier “writing” modifies. This modification does not make sense because the action denoted by “writing” does not make sense with the subject of the clause “A diary”. “A diary” does not perform the action of “writing”. Ria did that action. Hence, this sentence is incorrect.

Now study choices C (correct choice) and D of the official question:

Choice C: In 1923, the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia, ruling that it was a form of price-fixing, as such, an abridgment of the right of contract.

Choice D: In 1923, a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, ruling that it was a form of price-fixing, as such, an abridgment of the right of contract.

In choice C, “ruling” makes sense with “the Supreme Court” because the SC did the action of ruling and hence the modification is correct.

In choice D, the subject is “a minimum wage”. This subject does not make sense with the action denoted by “ruling”. Hence, this modification is incorrect.

Usage of “Verb-ing” Modifiers has been explained in detail in our concept named “Modifiers – Verb-ing”. This concept is listed under Level 1 Preview Concepts that are free for everyone. Just go to e-gmat.com, register for free and learn the concept. There are quizzes for your practice as well.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.

Can you please explain what is wrong with option E. Per the og explanation ,when is a subordinate clause. I need clarification, is it that when is a relative pronoun and that is why it make the sentence into subordinate clause.
Senior Manager
Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 329
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 195 [0], given: 12

Re: In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Jun 2013, 19:24
krishnasty wrote:
In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia as unconstitutional, and ruling that it was a form of price-fixing, as such, an abridgment of the right of contract.

A) the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia as unconstitutional, and
B) the Supreme Court declared as unconstitutional a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia, and
C) the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia,
D) a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia was declared nconstitutional by the Supreme Court ,
E) when the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia as unconstitutional,

The split here is to decide whether the part in the end of the underlined part is a modifier or a parallel element . , and -> doesn't qualify as parallel element as the ruling was the decision of the supreme court. Hence A and B are gone. E is gone because when is used for representing time.

Between D and C the modifier usage guides us to choose C as in D the modifier ruling is modifying a minimum wage and that's not the case. ruling is the supreme court action Hence C is the correct answer choice.
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10303
Followers: 1001

Kudos [?]: 225 [0], given: 0

Re: In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jul 2014, 03:36
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10303
Followers: 1001

Kudos [?]: 225 [0], given: 0

Re: In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Jul 2015, 09:23
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Manager
Joined: 01 Jun 2013
Posts: 126
GMAT 1: 650 Q50 V27
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 125 [0], given: 75

Re: In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2015, 06:11
daagh wrote:
In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia as unconstitutional, and ruling that it was a form of price-fixing, as such, an abridgment of the right of contract.

A) The Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia as unconstitutional, and --- and ruling is not parallel to declared

B) the Supreme Court declared as unconstitutional a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia, and—same as in A

C) the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia, ---- a simple sentence, with the Supreme court as the subject , declared as the main verb and ruling as the present participial modifier correct choices

D) a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court-------- Not withstanding that the clause is in passive voice, the present participial modifier – ruling -- modifies the clause starting with ---a minimum wage -- as if it is the minimum wage that invoked the ruling.

E) when the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women and children in the District of Columbia as unconstitutional,--- The main clasue is missing

In terms of meaning, shouldn't it be DECLARE X Y
It conveys a meaning that supreme court created some sort of wages that are unconstitutional. Supreme court created wage..
I think it should be "Supreme court declared minimum wage for women and children unconstitutional in the Distinct of Columbia"

_________________

Please kindly click on "+1 Kudos", if you think my post is useful

Re: In 1923, the Supreme Court declared a minimum wage for women   [#permalink] 29 Sep 2015, 06:11
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
8 Because the Supreme Court has ruled that 11 31 May 2016, 07:35
30 Although women’s wages are improving 16 13 Jul 2016, 00:58
7 In 1923, the supreme court declared a minimum wage for women 13 11 Dec 2015, 11:31
15 Although the Supreme Court ruled as long ago as 1880 that 31 05 Feb 2017, 13:04
Although the Supreme Court ruled as long ago as 1880 that 7 29 May 2013, 19:46
Display posts from previous: Sort by