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. Federal courts = final authority on creation of house districts
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
Roe v Wade 1973
Baker v Carr 1962
Hustler Magazine v Falwell 1988
2. Federal wiretaps of phone conversation is constitutional
Olmstead v US 1928
Cox v New Hampshire 1941
US v Eichman 1990
Webster v Reproductive Health Services 1987
3. Helped states to engage in eminent domain - said that fifth amendment right to take private property for public use is legal for states without eminent domain
Barron v Baltimore 1819
Grutter & Gratz v Bollinger 2003
Gibbons v Ogden 1824
Miller v California 1973
4. Overturned Olmstead - warrants were required to listen in on phone conversation
Baker v Carr 1962
Virginia v Black 2002
Katz v US 1967
Plessy v Ferguson 1896
5. Extended exclusionary rule to the states
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
Hustler Magazine v Falwell 1988
Mapp v Ohio 1961
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
6. States can regulate abortion but not with regulations that impose an 'undue burden' on women
Bush v Gore 2000
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
Furman v Georgia 1972
7. Demonstrations near schools that disrupted classes could be legally banned
Grayned v City of rockford 1972
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
Barron v Baltimore 1819
Miranda v Arizona 1966
8. Made the CRA 1964 apply to virtually all businesses
United States v Lopez 1995
Near v Minnesota 1931
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
9. Right to privacy
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
Texas v Johnson 1989
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
10. Prohibited state-sponsored recitation of prayer in public schools
Brown v Board 2nd 1955
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
Miller v California 1973
Engel v Vitale 1962
11. Halt to all death penalty punishments in nation until a less arbitrary method of sentencing was found
Furman v Georgia 1972
New York Times v US 1971
Katz v US 1967
Grutter & Gratz v Bollinger 2003
12. Parents may remove children from public school for religious reasons
Gregg v Georgia 1976
Powell v Alabama 1932
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
13. Any defendant who asked for a lawyer had to have one granted to him - or any confession after that point is inadmissible
Webster v Reproductive Health Services 1987
Bush v Gore 2000
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
14. Citizens of Japanese descent could be interned and deprived of basic constitutional rights due to executive order
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
Furman v Georgia 1972
Dennis v US 1951
Korematsu v US 1944
15. School district can suspend students for lewd or indecent speech
United States v Lopez 1995
Bethel School district v Fraser 1986
Fletcher v Peck 1810
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
16. Cities could legitimately require parade permits in the interest of pubic order (Jehovah's Witnesses march w/out permit)
Fletcher v Peck 1810
Olmstead v US 1928
Cox v New Hampshire 1941
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
17. Threw out undergraduate system of selection - generally upheld Bakke
Grutter & Gratz v Bollinger 2003
Miranda v Arizona 1966
Olmstead v US 1928
Kelo v New London 2005
18. 'Bad Tendency Doctrine -' speech restricted if it has tendency to lead to illegal actions; selectively incorporated freedom of speech to states
Betts v Brady 1942
Gitlow v NY 1925
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
Miller v California 1973
19. Secular rather than religious purpose? neither promote nor discourage religion? avoid 'excessive entanglement?'
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
US v Nixon 1974
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
Bethel School district v Fraser 1986
20. Confessions given immediately before rights are given means the confession is still admissible
Oregon v Elstad 1985
Virginia v Black 2002
Brandenburg v Ohio 1969
Bethel School district v Fraser 1986
21. 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
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
Gregg v Georgia 1976
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
22. Race cannot be sole or predominant factor in redrawing legislative district boundaries (1982 VRA wants them to do that - though)
Mapp v Ohio 1961
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
Olmstead v US 1928
23. Mandated 21-year-old drinking age (if you don't feds will take away all federal highway funds
South Dakota v Dole 1987
Near v Minnesota 1931
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
24. State prohibition of consensual sodomy in private is unreasonable invasion of privacy
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
Lawrence v Texas 2003
Grayned v City of rockford 1972
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
25. Florida recount in 2000 election was a violation of fourteenth amendment's equal protection clause
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
Bush v Gore 2000
Clinton v New York 1998
26. First time court overturned state law on constitutional grounds.
Fletcher v Peck 1810
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
Gitlow v NY 1925
27. Established national abortion guidelines by extending inferred right of privacy from Griswold
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
Roe v Wade 1973
Grayned v City of rockford 1972
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
28. You can burn the flag
Texas v Johnson 1989
Korematsu v US 1944
Plessy v Ferguson 1896
Near v Minnesota 1931
29. Not libel when they thought it was true at the time of printing
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
Gregg v Georgia 1976
30. Commerce clause of the constitution does not give congress the power to regulate guns near state operated schools
Powell v Alabama 1932
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
United States v Lopez 1995
Oregon v Elstad 1985
31. No such thing as executive privilege in criminal cases - but definitely at other times
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
Weeks v US 1914
US v Nixon 1974
South Dakota v Dole 1987
32. African Americans denied right to vote in primaries = violate fifteenth amendment
Smith v Allwright 1944
Brandenburg v Ohio 1969
New York Times v US 1971
Near v Minnesota 1931
33. Legitimate use of eminent domain - town wanting to buy private land and turn it over to private developers
Kelo v New London 2005
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
34. Established exclusionary rule
United States v Lopez 1995
Roe v Wade 1973
Dennis v US 1951
Weeks v US 1914
35. Invalidated 1989 Flag Protection Act
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
Plessy v Ferguson 1896
US v Eichman 1990
36. Clear and present danger (yelling fire) - Holmes
Katz v US 1967
Schenck v US 1919
Miranda v Arizona 1966
Oregon v Elstad 1985
37. 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
Lawrence v Texas 2003
Bethel School district v Fraser 1986
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
38. NY could not grant steamship company monopoly - increased federal power over interstate commerce
Gregg v Georgia 1976
Gibbons v Ogden 1824
Tinker v Des Moines 1969
Virginia v Black 2002
39. 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
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
Hustler Magazine v Falwell 1988
Kelo v New London 2005
40. Executive efforts to prevent publication forbidden (Ellsburg & Vietnam)
Clinton v New York 1998
Plessy v Ferguson 1896
Engel v Vitale 1962
New York Times v US 1971
41. Separate is not equal
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
Weeks v US 1914
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
42. Strikes by labor unions are constitutional
Weeks v US 1914
Cox v New Hampshire 1941
Miranda v Arizona 1966
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
43. States cannot set term limits on members of congress
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
Roe v Wade 1973
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
44. Fighting words - certain offensive types of speech prohibited
Powell v Alabama 1932
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
Texas v Johnson 1989
US v Eichman 1990
45. All state governments must provide an attorney in all cases for those who can't afford one - powerful repudiation of Betts v Brady
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
Gideon v Wainwright 1963
South Dakota v Dole 1987
46. Cross burning = 'fighting words' = unconstitutional
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
Near v Minnesota 1931
Virginia v Black 2002
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
47. Peaceable assembly for lawful discussion cannot be made a crime - selectively incorporated right to lawful assembly to all state governments
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
Tinker v Des Moines 1969
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
Gibbons v Ogden 1824
48. All defendants must be informed of legal rights before they are arrested
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
Miranda v Arizona 1966
New York Times v US 1971
Engel v Vitale 1962
49. Prohibited states from banning teaching of evolution in public schools
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
Olmstead v US 1928
Gideon v Wainwright 1963
50. Forbids execution of defendants who are mentally retarded
Lawrence v Texas 2003
Grutter & Gratz v Bollinger 2003
Grayned v City of rockford 1972
Gregg v Georgia 1976