Stop and frisk, which involved unprompted searches and questioning of

Hi

Let me try to address your query.

In this sentence, we are talking about the practice of "stop and frisk", ie; the practice that involves "unprompted searches and questioning of civilians on the street by police officers". The sentence tells us that this practice was put to an end by the judge.

Therefore, while stop and frisk are indeed two acts, the sentence talks about a single practice of the police which involves both of these things. Therefore, the correct usage is singular.

Additionally, in (B), a single decision of the judge (that of ruling the practice of "stop and frisk" unconstitutional) is associated with the plural verb "were", which is incorrect.

Hope this helps.

How I tackled this question?
1. Usage of Back-to-back modifiers is not a good construct. So A
is out.
2. 'Stop and frisk', refers to the same rule. So, a singular linking verb was should be used. So, B & C are out
3. In D linking verb is used twice, which makes it redundant.

So, E is correct

It's like bread and butter. Even though they are two nouns they are considered as one.

A. ruled unconstitutional by a U. S. District Court judge; this decision effectively put- The use of ; is not correct. The following is not an independent clause.

b. were ruled unconstitutional by a U. S. District Court judge and were a decision that effectively put- It(Stop and frisk) is a single entity so the usage of plural -"were"- is wrong

c. were ruled unconstitutional by a U. S. District Court judge, and effectively, by this decision, put-Same as in B

d. was ruled unconstitutional by a U. S. District Court judge and was a decision effectively putting-use of singular (was) is correct but is redundant... we might have a better choice.

e. was ruled unconstitutional by a U. S. District Court judge, a decision effectively putting-Correct. Also "a decision effectively putting" correctly modifies the decision to rule stop and frisk as unconstitutional.
Please correct me if I am wrong.

D is not just wrong because of the redundancy issue. It changes the meaning, by stating that "Stop and Frisk" was a decision. That's why it is wrong.

In A, Is there any error regarding the requirement of "was"? What would be the situations in which we can skip the helping verb?

And How is the second sentence being called "not-independent clause"? It clearly has S-V, and makes sense too.

[quote="crackverbalgmat"]

Thank you so much
I got your point !!

Stop and frisk,
which involved unprompted searches and questioning of civilians on the street by police officers,
ruled unconstitutional by a U.S. District Court judge;
this decision effectively put an end to this controversial law enforcement practice.

A. ruled unconstitutional by a U. S. District Court judge; this decision effectively put

b. were ruled unconstitutional by a U. S. District Court judge and were a decision that effectively put

c. were ruled unconstitutional by a U. S. District Court judge, and effectively, by this decision, put

d. was ruled unconstitutional by a U. S. District Court judge and was a decision effectively putting

e. was ruled unconstitutional by a U. S. District Court judge, a decision effectively putting

IMO E