Option(C) is correct There are two main issues in the original question. (1) Since there are only two options for the important choice, one must use whether not if (2) The new administration is a singular noun and cannot be referred to with the plural pronoun they A. if must be replaced by whether since only two options exist for the choice; the plural pronoun they improperly refers back to a singular noun (i.e., new administration) B. present moment is redundant as both words convey the same meaning C. whether is properly used instead of if as only two options exist; the singular pronoun it properly refers back to a singular noun (i.e., new administration) D. the plural pronoun they improperly refers back to a singular noun (i.e., new administration) E. the phrase the advancement of is unduly wordy and should be replaced by to advance

Option(C) is correct After the comma we need the name of the person. In answer D, the use of which is incorrect. Answer E unnecessarily uses a passive construction.

Option(D) is correct There are two major problems with this sentence. (1) The subject (his writings, which is plural) does not agree with the verb (is, which is singular). Since the words his writings are located outside the underlined portion, the verbis must be changed to are. (2) The idiom more often than is intended to compare the writings of Douglas Kysar with the writings of other young legal scholars. However, the original sentence compares Kysar's writings with other young legal scholars. It does not make sense to compare writings to people. The correct comparison should compare the writings of Kysar to those of most other young legal scholars, where the pronoun those clearly refers to legal writings--not young professors. A. The subject (his writings, which is plural) does not agree with the verb (is, which is singular); the writings of Douglas Kysar are illogically compared to other young legal scholars B. The writings of Douglas Kysar are illogically compared to other young legal scholars C. The subject (his writings, which is plural) does not agree with the verb (is, which is singular) D. The subject (his writings, which is plural) correctly agrees with the verb (are, which is plural); the writings of Douglas Kysar are correctly compared to those [referring to writings] of most other young legal scholars E. The writings of Douglas Kysar are illogically compared to other young legal scholars; the are is awkward

Option(D) is correct There are two problems with the original sentence. (1) The subject (The Battle of Bull Run) lacks a verb. was or is must be inserted so that the subject can have a verb. (2) The phrase in that this historic event was is wordy and could be made more concise. A. the subject (The Battle of Bull Run) lacks a verb; the phrase in that this historic event was is wordy and could be made more concise B. the subject (The Battle of Bull Run) lacks a verb; the phrase event in American history marking the first major ground needs to be split up by a comma after history in order to give the correct idea that marking modifies the idea that precedes it C. the past tense was gives the false impression that the Battle was at some point in the past important, but it is not important today; the past perfect tense had markedis incorrect D. the subject has a present tense verb; the sentence is concise; the , which modifies what directly precedes it (namely the Civil War) and this modification is logical E. the phrase resulting in the death of over 500,000 illogically modifies the subject that precedes it (The Battle of Bull Run), giving the false impression that over 500,000 people died in this one battle Note: which modifies the word or term immediately preceding the comma (i.e., the Civil War) in the correct answer while resulting in the death of over 500,000 modifies the subject or idea to which it refers (The Battle of Bull Run)

Option(B) is correct The meaning has to be clear that he did not see her, nor did she see him.