Which statement best describes de jure segregation compared to de facto segregation?

• A. De jure is by law; de facto is by practice or effect.
• B. De jure is by custom; de facto is by statute.
• C. De jure refers to federal law; de facto to state law.
• D. De jure and de facto are the same in civil rights contexts.

Answer: (A)

The main idea is the difference between segregation that is mandated by law and segregation that arises from everyday practices. De jure segregation is by law and enforcement—official rules that require separate facilities, schools, or services. De facto segregation comes from practice or effect; it happens through patterns in housing, income, or social behavior rather than explicit legal commands.

So the statement that best describes this distinction is that de jure is by law; de facto is by practice or effect. For example, Jim Crow laws created de jure segregation by officially separating facilities and rights. Even after those laws ended, many communities remained segregated in practice due to where people could afford to live and attend school, reflecting de facto segregation.

The other options mix up the definitions or misstate the relationship, such as confusing law with custom, or federal versus state distinctions, or claiming they are the same in civil rights contexts.