The phrase "a plausible argument that" is correct and usable in written English.
You can use it when discussing a reasoning or claim that appears reasonable or believable in a particular context.
Example: "In her essay, she presented a plausible argument that climate change is primarily driven by human activities."
Alternatives: "a convincing case that" or "a reasonable assertion that".
This is a plausible argument that may stimulate further research on this topic.
There is indeed a plausible argument that military action in recent years has made Britain less, not more, secure.
The NCAA defendants are appealing their convictions and have a plausible argument that prosecutors have pushed the boundaries of criminal fraud too far.
So there is a plausible argument that it shouldn't apply to a debt-questioning law a century and a half later.
But let's also acknowledge this: Although he will not say so, there is at least a plausible argument that he might be better off if they lose.
The results present a plausible argument that laboratory analogs can characterize groundwater water flow, solute transport, and mass exchange between the conduit and matrix domains in a karst aquifer.
Nor, as the opinion of Mr. Justice WHITE amply demonstrates, is there any plausible argument that a rule excluding such evidence from use at a later trial adds an ounce of deterrence against police violation of the Mallory rule.
The examples of States avoiding liability for patent infringement by pleading sovereign immunity in a federal-court patent action are scarce enough, but any plausible argument that such action on the part of the State deprived patentees of property and left them without a remedy under state law is scarcer still.
Given the concerns of the framers and the ratifiers, you would have to work really hard to make even a minimally plausible argument that he committed an impeachable offense.
Would the United States prevail in a case like this, where there is a colorable security justification, but where there is also a very plausible argument that the real motivation doesn't have much to do with security?
George Mason Law School professor Ilya Somin told me that while it's not unusual to see a presidential administration attempt to finagle grant conditions, he's "not aware of a case as blatant as this one where the executive branch just seems to make up conditions on its own, and doesn't even have a minimally plausible argument that they were included in the bill Congress passed".
