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. Mandated 21-year-old drinking age (if you don't feds will take away all federal highway funds
US v Eichman 1990
South Dakota v Dole 1987
Woodson v North Carolina 1976
Webster v Reproductive Health Services 1987
2. Separate is not equal
Dennis v US 1951
Weeks v US 1914
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
3. Students don't 'shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse door -' Iowa students suspended for wearing armbands to protest Vietnam war
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
Gibbons v Ogden 1824
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
Tinker v Des Moines 1969
4. States did not have power to tax the national bank - reinforces supremacy clause
Marbury v Madison 1803
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
5. Protesters have substantially fewer assembly rights in malls and other private establishments
Schenck v US 1919
Gideon v Wainwright 1963
United States v Lopez 1995
Lloyd corporation v Tanner 1972
6. Extended exclusionary rule to the states
Furman v Georgia 1972
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
Mapp v Ohio 1961
7. Secular rather than religious purpose? neither promote nor discourage religion? avoid 'excessive entanglement?'
Gregg v Georgia 1976
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
Buckley v Baleo 1976
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
8. Executive efforts to prevent publication forbidden (Ellsburg & Vietnam)
Gibbons v Ogden 1824
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
South Dakota v Dole 1987
New York Times v US 1971
9. 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
Tinker v Des Moines 1969
Brown v Board 2nd 1955
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
10. No such thing as executive privilege in criminal cases - but definitely at other times
Fletcher v Peck 1810
Powell v Alabama 1932
US v Nixon 1974
Plessy v Ferguson 1896
11. Peaceable assembly for lawful discussion cannot be made a crime - selectively incorporated right to lawful assembly to all state governments
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
Lloyd corporation v Tanner 1972
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
12. Halt to all death penalty punishments in nation until a less arbitrary method of sentencing was found
Furman v Georgia 1972
Woodson v North Carolina 1976
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
13. School district can suspend students for lewd or indecent speech
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
Brandenburg v Ohio 1969
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
Bethel School district v Fraser 1986
14. 'Bad Tendency Doctrine -' speech restricted if it has tendency to lead to illegal actions; selectively incorporated freedom of speech to states
Gitlow v NY 1925
Roe v Wade 1973
New York Times v US 1971
United States v Lopez 1995
15. Clear and present danger (yelling fire) - Holmes
Schenck v US 1919
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
Mapp v Ohio 1961
16. Invalidated 1989 Flag Protection Act
Furman v Georgia 1972
US v Eichman 1990
Oregon v Elstad 1985
Near v Minnesota 1931
17. 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
Roe v Wade 1973
Hustler Magazine v Falwell 1988
Barron v Baltimore 1819
Bethel School district v Fraser 1986
18. NY could not grant steamship company monopoly - increased federal power over interstate commerce
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
Gibbons v Ogden 1824
Fletcher v Peck 1810
19. Banned presidential use of a line=item veto as a violation of legislative powers.
New York Times v US 1971
Clinton v New York 1998
Engel v Vitale 1962
US v Eichman 1990
20. State prohibition of consensual sodomy in private is unreasonable invasion of privacy
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
Baker v Carr 1962
Buckley v Baleo 1976
Lawrence v Texas 2003
21. Fighting words - certain offensive types of speech prohibited
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
Fletcher v Peck 1810
Smith v Allwright 1944
22. Commerce clause of the constitution does not give congress the power to regulate guns near state operated schools
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
United States v Lopez 1995
Katz v US 1967
23. Established exclusionary rule
Tinker v Des Moines 1969
Weeks v US 1914
Smith v Allwright 1944
Fletcher v Peck 1810
24. Prohibited states from banning teaching of evolution in public schools
Baker v Carr 1962
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
Furman v Georgia 1972
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
25. Gave states more power to regulate abortion
Webster v Reproductive Health Services 1987
Roe v Wade 1973
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
26. Race cannot be sole or predominant factor in redrawing legislative district boundaries (1982 VRA wants them to do that - though)
Miranda v Arizona 1966
Lloyd corporation v Tanner 1972
Grayned v City of rockford 1972
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
27. All state governments must provide an attorney in all cases for those who can't afford one - powerful repudiation of Betts v Brady
Abington School District v Schempp 1963
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
Gideon v Wainwright 1963
US v Nixon 1974
28. Legitimate use of eminent domain - town wanting to buy private land and turn it over to private developers
Bush v Gore 2000
Kelo v New London 2005
Buckley v Baleo 1976
US v Eichman 1990
29. Giving money to political campaign = free speech - so wealthy people can now spend as much of their own money as they want if they choose to run for federal office
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
Smith v Allwright 1944
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
Buckley v Baleo 1976
30. Confessions given immediately before rights are given means the confession is still admissible
Schenck v US 1919
Miranda v Arizona 1966
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
Oregon v Elstad 1985
31. 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
US v Nixon 1974
Gregg v Georgia 1976
South Dakota v Dole 1987
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
32. Libel and obscenity not protected by first amendment - so three-part obscenity test established
Miller v California 1973
Woodson v North Carolina 1976
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
Mapp v Ohio 1961
33. FCRA mandated that places of public accommodation are prohibited from discrimination against blacks
South Dakota v Dole 1987
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
Powell v Alabama 1932
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
34. Cross burning = 'fighting words' = unconstitutional
US v Eichman 1990
Woodson v North Carolina 1976
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
Virginia v Black 2002
35. Threw out undergraduate system of selection - generally upheld Bakke
Clinton v New York 1998
Grutter & Gratz v Bollinger 2003
Gitlow v NY 1925
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
36. Citizens of Japanese descent could be interned and deprived of basic constitutional rights due to executive order
Olmstead v US 1928
Gideon v Wainwright 1963
Miranda v Arizona 1966
Korematsu v US 1944
37. Strikes by labor unions are constitutional
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
Hustler Magazine v Falwell 1988
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
Brown v Board 2nd 1955
38. Not libel when they thought it was true at the time of printing
New York Times v US 1971
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
Barron v Baltimore 1819
39. Demonstrations near schools that disrupted classes could be legally banned
Lloyd corporation v Tanner 1972
Grayned v City of rockford 1972
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
40. Segregate with al 'due and deliberate speed'
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
United States v Lopez 1995
Brandenburg v Ohio 1969
Brown v Board 2nd 1955
41. Forbids execution of defendants who are mentally retarded
Gregg v Georgia 1976
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
United States v Lopez 1995
Kelo v New London 2005
42. States cannot set term limits on members of congress
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
Korematsu v US 1944
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
Betts v Brady 1942
43. Separate but equal for races
Clinton v New York 1998
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
Fletcher v Peck 1810
Plessy v Ferguson 1896
44. Established national abortion guidelines by extending inferred right of privacy from Griswold
Roe v Wade 1973
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
Gideon v Wainwright 1963
Bethel School district v Fraser 1986
45. Federal wiretaps of phone conversation is constitutional
Fletcher v Peck 1810
Olmstead v US 1928
South Dakota v Dole 1987
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
46. Made the CRA 1964 apply to virtually all businesses
Gibbons v Ogden 1824
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
Gideon v Wainwright 1963
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
47. 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
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
Lawrence v Texas 2003
Gideon v Wainwright 1963
48. NC makes mandatory punishment for certain crimes - deemed unconstitutional
Woodson v North Carolina 1976
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
Virginia v Black 2002
Marbury v Madison 1803
49. Overturned Olmstead - warrants were required to listen in on phone conversation
Clinton v New York 1998
New York Times v US 1971
Katz v US 1967
Mapp v Ohio 1961
50. Race-based affirmative action was permissible so long as it was in the service of creating greater diversity
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
Clinton v New York 1998
Marbury v Madison 1803
Cox v New Hampshire 1941
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