SUBJECTS
|
BROWSE
|
CAREER CENTER
|
POPULAR
|
JOIN
|
LOGIN
Business Skills
|
Soft Skills
|
Basic Literacy
|
Certifications
About
|
Help
|
Privacy
|
Terms
|
Email
Search
Test your basic knowledge |
Important Court Cases
Start Test
Study First
Subject
:
law
Instructions:
Answer 50 questions in 15 minutes.
If you are not ready to take this test, you can
study here
.
Match each statement with the correct term.
Don't refresh. All questions and answers are randomly picked and ordered every time you load a test.
This is a study tool. The 3 wrong answers for each question are randomly chosen from answers to other questions. So, you might find at times the answers obvious, but you will see it re-enforces your understanding as you take the test each time.
1. All defendants must be informed of legal rights before they are arrested
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
Abington School District v Schempp 1963
Miranda v Arizona 1966
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
2. Established exclusionary rule
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
Weeks v US 1914
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
Barron v Baltimore 1819
3. Cross burning = 'fighting words' = unconstitutional
Buckley v Baleo 1976
Brown v Board 2nd 1955
Virginia v Black 2002
Lawrence v Texas 2003
4. Peaceable assembly for lawful discussion cannot be made a crime - selectively incorporated right to lawful assembly to all state governments
Plessy v Ferguson 1896
Lawrence v Texas 2003
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
Clinton v New York 1998
5. Court rebuffed an attempt by state of New Hampshire to take control of Dartmouth by holding that Dartmouth's corporate charter was qualified as a contract between private parties
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
Miranda v Arizona 1966
Woodson v North Carolina 1976
6. States can regulate abortion but not with regulations that impose an 'undue burden' on women
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
Dennis v US 1951
Bush v Gore 2000
Webster v Reproductive Health Services 1987
7. Citizens of Japanese descent could be interned and deprived of basic constitutional rights due to executive order
Bethel School district v Fraser 1986
Webster v Reproductive Health Services 1987
Korematsu v US 1944
Abington School District v Schempp 1963
8. Extended exclusionary rule to the states
Mapp v Ohio 1961
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
Grutter & Gratz v Bollinger 2003
9. NC makes mandatory punishment for certain crimes - deemed unconstitutional
Furman v Georgia 1972
Woodson v North Carolina 1976
Clinton v New York 1998
Korematsu v US 1944
10. State prohibition of consensual sodomy in private is unreasonable invasion of privacy
Dennis v US 1951
Texas v Johnson 1989
Lawrence v Texas 2003
Miranda v Arizona 1966
11. Clear and present danger (yelling fire) - Holmes
Plessy v Ferguson 1896
Schenck v US 1919
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
12. Any defendant who asked for a lawyer had to have one granted to him - or any confession after that point is inadmissible
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
Betts v Brady 1942
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
Kelo v New London 2005
13. Established national abortion guidelines by extending inferred right of privacy from Griswold
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
Roe v Wade 1973
Grayned v City of rockford 1972
Lloyd corporation v Tanner 1972
14. Fighting words - certain offensive types of speech prohibited
US v Nixon 1974
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
Clinton v New York 1998
Korematsu v US 1944
15. Fed can limit speech that doesn't lead to action (upholding Smith Act - which made it a crime to support any communist organization)
Dennis v US 1951
Baker v Carr 1962
Betts v Brady 1942
South Dakota v Dole 1987
16. You can burn the flag
Betts v Brady 1942
Texas v Johnson 1989
Marbury v Madison 1803
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
17. Right to privacy
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
Gregg v Georgia 1976
Smith v Allwright 1944
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
18. Selectively incorporates freedom of the press - prevents prior restraint -state injunctions to prevent publication unconstitutional
Oregon v Elstad 1985
Dennis v US 1951
Near v Minnesota 1931
Engel v Vitale 1962
19. Established judicial review
Gitlow v NY 1925
Miller v California 1973
Marbury v Madison 1803
New York Times v US 1971
20. Race cannot be sole or predominant factor in redrawing legislative district boundaries (1982 VRA wants them to do that - though)
Weeks v US 1914
Schenck v US 1919
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
Oregon v Elstad 1985
21. Florida recount in 2000 election was a violation of fourteenth amendment's equal protection clause
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
Olmstead v US 1928
Bush v Gore 2000
22. Race-based affirmative action was permissible so long as it was in the service of creating greater diversity
Miller v California 1973
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
Miranda v Arizona 1966
Brandenburg v Ohio 1969
23. Ordered house districts to be near as equal as possible - enshrined principal of 'one man - one vote.'
Near v Minnesota 1931
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
Cox v New Hampshire 1941
24. All state governments must provide an attorney in all cases for those who can't afford one - powerful repudiation of Betts v Brady
Marbury v Madison 1803
Gideon v Wainwright 1963
Powell v Alabama 1932
US v Nixon 1974
25. School district can suspend students for lewd or indecent speech
New York Times v US 1971
Marbury v Madison 1803
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
Bethel School district v Fraser 1986
26. Gave states more power to regulate abortion
Webster v Reproductive Health Services 1987
Olmstead v US 1928
Grayned v City of rockford 1972
Near v Minnesota 1931
27. Forbids execution of defendants who are mentally retarded
South Dakota v Dole 1987
Buckley v Baleo 1976
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
Gregg v Georgia 1976
28. Forbids state-mandated bible reading
Abington School District v Schempp 1963
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
Buckley v Baleo 1976
Weeks v US 1914
29. Segregate with al 'due and deliberate speed'
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
Woodson v North Carolina 1976
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
Brown v Board 2nd 1955
30. BSA could expel any homosexual member they wanted because of first amendment right of expressive association
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
Korematsu v US 1944
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
Oregon v Elstad 1985
31. Separate but equal for races
Brandenburg v Ohio 1969
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
Plessy v Ferguson 1896
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
32. Demonstrations near schools that disrupted classes could be legally banned
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
Tinker v Des Moines 1969
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
Grayned v City of rockford 1972
33. Threw out undergraduate system of selection - generally upheld Bakke
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
Grutter & Gratz v Bollinger 2003
Furman v Georgia 1972
Oregon v Elstad 1985
34. Intentional infliction of emotional distress was permissible First Amendment speech as long as it was about a public official - and no one would actually think it was fact
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
Hustler Magazine v Falwell 1988
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
Gregg v Georgia 1976
35. State govs must provide counsel in cases involving the death penalty to those who can't afford it
Hustler Magazine v Falwell 1988
Powell v Alabama 1932
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
Barron v Baltimore 1819
36. Students don't 'shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse door -' Iowa students suspended for wearing armbands to protest Vietnam war
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
Betts v Brady 1942
Gideon v Wainwright 1963
Tinker v Des Moines 1969
37. Libel and obscenity not protected by first amendment - so three-part obscenity test established
US v Eichman 1990
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
Miller v California 1973
Hustler Magazine v Falwell 1988
38. Overruled Powell - state govs do not have to provide lawyers to indigent defendants in capital cases
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
Tinker v Des Moines 1969
Betts v Brady 1942
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
39. Executive efforts to prevent publication forbidden (Ellsburg & Vietnam)
Webster v Reproductive Health Services 1987
New York Times v US 1971
Weeks v US 1914
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
40. Overturned Olmstead - warrants were required to listen in on phone conversation
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
Schenck v US 1919
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
Katz v US 1967
41. States did not have power to tax the national bank - reinforces supremacy clause
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
Grutter & Gratz v Bollinger 2003
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
Fletcher v Peck 1810
42. Legitimate use of eminent domain - town wanting to buy private land and turn it over to private developers
Cox v New Hampshire 1941
Kelo v New London 2005
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
43. Federal courts = final authority on creation of house districts
Oregon v Elstad 1985
Grutter & Gratz v Bollinger 2003
Furman v Georgia 1972
Baker v Carr 1962
44. Invalidated 1989 Flag Protection Act
Kelo v New London 2005
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
US v Eichman 1990
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
45. Banned presidential use of a line=item veto as a violation of legislative powers.
Clinton v New York 1998
Korematsu v US 1944
Engel v Vitale 1962
Roe v Wade 1973
46. Mandated 21-year-old drinking age (if you don't feds will take away all federal highway funds
Bethel School district v Fraser 1986
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
Mapp v Ohio 1961
South Dakota v Dole 1987
47. NY could not grant steamship company monopoly - increased federal power over interstate commerce
Near v Minnesota 1931
Miranda v Arizona 1966
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
Gibbons v Ogden 1824
48. Confessions given immediately before rights are given means the confession is still admissible
Hustler Magazine v Falwell 1988
Oregon v Elstad 1985
Olmstead v US 1928
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
49. Separate is not equal
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
Smith v Allwright 1944
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
Grutter & Gratz v Bollinger 2003
50. Protesters have substantially fewer assembly rights in malls and other private establishments
US v Eichman 1990
Lloyd corporation v Tanner 1972
Weeks v US 1914
Grutter & Gratz v Bollinger 2003
Sorry!:) No result found.
Can you answer 50 questions in 15 minutes?
Let me suggest you:
Browse all subjects
Browse all tests
Most popular tests
Major Subjects
Tests & Exams
AP
CLEP
DSST
GRE
SAT
GMAT
Certifications
CISSP go to https://www.isc2.org/
PMP
ITIL
RHCE
MCTS
More...
IT Skills
Android Programming
Data Modeling
Objective C Programming
Basic Python Programming
Adobe Illustrator
More...
Business Skills
Advertising Techniques
Business Accounting Basics
Business Strategy
Human Resource Management
Marketing Basics
More...
Soft Skills
Body Language
People Skills
Public Speaking
Persuasion
Job Hunting And Resumes
More...
Vocabulary
GRE Vocab
SAT Vocab
TOEFL Essential Vocab
Basic English Words For All
Global Words You Should Know
Business English
More...
Languages
AP German Vocab
AP Latin Vocab
SAT Subject Test: French
Italian Survival
Norwegian Survival
More...
Engineering
Audio Engineering
Computer Science Engineering
Aerospace Engineering
Chemical Engineering
Structural Engineering
More...
Health Sciences
Basic Nursing Skills
Health Science Language Fundamentals
Veterinary Technology Medical Language
Cardiology
Clinical Surgery
More...
English
Grammar Fundamentals
Literary And Rhetorical Vocab
Elements Of Style Vocab
Introduction To English Major
Complete Advanced Sentences
Literature
Homonyms
More...
Math
Algebra Formulas
Basic Arithmetic: Measurements
Metric Conversions
Geometric Properties
Important Math Facts
Number Sense Vocab
Business Math
More...
Other Major Subjects
Science
Economics
History
Law
Performing-arts
Cooking
Logic & Reasoning
Trivia
Browse all subjects
Browse all tests
Most popular tests