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. Executive efforts to prevent publication forbidden (Ellsburg & Vietnam)
New York Times v US 1971
Gideon v Wainwright 1963
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
Grayned v City of rockford 1972
2. Students don't 'shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse door -' Iowa students suspended for wearing armbands to protest Vietnam war
Katz v US 1967
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
Tinker v Des Moines 1969
Weeks v US 1914
3. Prohibited state-sponsored recitation of prayer in public schools
Engel v Vitale 1962
Dennis v US 1951
Powell v Alabama 1932
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
4. Selectively incorporates freedom of the press - prevents prior restraint -state injunctions to prevent publication unconstitutional
Fletcher v Peck 1810
Miranda v Arizona 1966
Barron v Baltimore 1819
Near v Minnesota 1931
5. 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
Engel v Vitale 1962
Cox v New Hampshire 1941
Brown v Board 2nd 1955
6. Separate but equal for races
Engel v Vitale 1962
Gideon v Wainwright 1963
Plessy v Ferguson 1896
United States v Lopez 1995
7. NY could not grant steamship company monopoly - increased federal power over interstate commerce
Gibbons v Ogden 1824
Smith v Allwright 1944
Buckley v Baleo 1976
Katz v US 1967
8. Invalidated 1989 Flag Protection Act
Barron v Baltimore 1819
US v Eichman 1990
Oregon v Elstad 1985
Dennis v US 1951
9. Federal wiretaps of phone conversation is constitutional
Powell v Alabama 1932
Kelo v New London 2005
Olmstead v US 1928
Miranda v Arizona 1966
10. Forbids state-mandated bible reading
Dennis v US 1951
Katz v US 1967
Abington School District v Schempp 1963
Engel v Vitale 1962
11. BSA could expel any homosexual member they wanted because of first amendment right of expressive association
Furman v Georgia 1972
Grayned v City of rockford 1972
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
Brandenburg v Ohio 1969
12. Fed can limit speech that doesn't lead to action (upholding Smith Act - which made it a crime to support any communist organization)
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
Furman v Georgia 1972
Dennis v US 1951
13. Threw out undergraduate system of selection - generally upheld Bakke
Betts v Brady 1942
Grutter & Gratz v Bollinger 2003
Virginia v Black 2002
Gitlow v NY 1925
14. FCRA mandated that places of public accommodation are prohibited from discrimination against blacks
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
Webster v Reproductive Health Services 1987
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
15. Race cannot be sole or predominant factor in redrawing legislative district boundaries (1982 VRA wants them to do that - though)
Baker v Carr 1962
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
Korematsu v US 1944
16. 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
Marbury v Madison 1803
South Dakota v Dole 1987
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
Buckley v Baleo 1976
17. 'Bad Tendency Doctrine -' speech restricted if it has tendency to lead to illegal actions; selectively incorporated freedom of speech to states
Gideon v Wainwright 1963
Clinton v New York 1998
Gitlow v NY 1925
Grutter & Gratz v Bollinger 2003
18. African Americans denied right to vote in primaries = violate fifteenth amendment
Fletcher v Peck 1810
Smith v Allwright 1944
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
Plessy v Ferguson 1896
19. Secular rather than religious purpose? neither promote nor discourage religion? avoid 'excessive entanglement?'
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
Grutter & Gratz v Bollinger 2003
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
20. Made the CRA 1964 apply to virtually all businesses
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
Tinker v Des Moines 1969
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
Bush v Gore 2000
21. Cross burning = 'fighting words' = unconstitutional
Virginia v Black 2002
Kelo v New London 2005
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
Katz v US 1967
22. Clear and present danger (yelling fire) - Holmes
Gibbons v Ogden 1824
Betts v Brady 1942
Near v Minnesota 1931
Schenck v US 1919
23. Parents may remove children from public school for religious reasons
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
24. School district can suspend students for lewd or indecent speech
Fletcher v Peck 1810
Gitlow v NY 1925
Bethel School district v Fraser 1986
Bush v Gore 2000
25. Overruled Powell - state govs do not have to provide lawyers to indigent defendants in capital cases
Miller v California 1973
Abington School District v Schempp 1963
Betts v Brady 1942
Kelo v New London 2005
26. States cannot set term limits on members of congress
Webster v Reproductive Health Services 1987
Powell v Alabama 1932
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
New York Times v US 1971
27. Libel and obscenity not protected by first amendment - so three-part obscenity test established
Texas v Johnson 1989
Miller v California 1973
Gideon v Wainwright 1963
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
28. States did not have power to tax the national bank - reinforces supremacy clause
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
Brown v Board 2nd 1955
Weeks v US 1914
29. Florida recount in 2000 election was a violation of fourteenth amendment's equal protection clause
Barron v Baltimore 1819
Betts v Brady 1942
Schenck v US 1919
Bush v Gore 2000
30. States not allowed to prevent or punish inflammatory speech unless it will lead to imminent lawless action
Betts v Brady 1942
Grutter & Gratz v Bollinger 2003
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
Brandenburg v Ohio 1969
31. Established judicial review
Marbury v Madison 1803
US v Eichman 1990
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
Near v Minnesota 1931
32. Overturned Olmstead - warrants were required to listen in on phone conversation
Engel v Vitale 1962
Woodson v North Carolina 1976
Katz v US 1967
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
33. Federal courts = final authority on creation of house districts
Clinton v New York 1998
Korematsu v US 1944
Baker v Carr 1962
Weeks v US 1914
34. Separate is not equal
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
Gitlow v NY 1925
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
Hustler Magazine v Falwell 1988
35. Segregate with al 'due and deliberate speed'
Cox v New Hampshire 1941
Brown v Board 2nd 1955
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
Bush v Gore 2000
36. Banned presidential use of a line=item veto as a violation of legislative powers.
Barron v Baltimore 1819
Smith v Allwright 1944
Clinton v New York 1998
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
37. Peaceable assembly for lawful discussion cannot be made a crime - selectively incorporated right to lawful assembly to all state governments
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
Miller v California 1973
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
38. 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
Hustler Magazine v Falwell 1988
Katz v US 1967
Kelo v New London 2005
Gideon v Wainwright 1963
39. States can regulate abortion but not with regulations that impose an 'undue burden' on women
Tinker v Des Moines 1969
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
South Dakota v Dole 1987
United States v Lopez 1995
40. 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
Engel v Vitale 1962
Weeks v US 1914
Lawrence v Texas 2003
41. All state governments must provide an attorney in all cases for those who can't afford one - powerful repudiation of Betts v Brady
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
Mapp v Ohio 1961
Gregg v Georgia 1976
Gideon v Wainwright 1963
42. All defendants must be informed of legal rights before they are arrested
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
Miranda v Arizona 1966
Gideon v Wainwright 1963
Grutter & Gratz v Bollinger 2003
43. Forbids execution of defendants who are mentally retarded
Clinton v New York 1998
Gregg v Georgia 1976
Oregon v Elstad 1985
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
44. Commerce clause of the constitution does not give congress the power to regulate guns near state operated schools
United States v Lopez 1995
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
Buckley v Baleo 1976
Abington School District v Schempp 1963
45. Confessions given immediately before rights are given means the confession is still admissible
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
Oregon v Elstad 1985
US v Eichman 1990
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
46. Established exclusionary rule
Weeks v US 1914
Grayned v City of rockford 1972
Gregg v Georgia 1976
South Dakota v Dole 1987
47. Demonstrations near schools that disrupted classes could be legally banned
Grayned v City of rockford 1972
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
Gibbons v Ogden 1824
Marbury v Madison 1803
48. 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
Kelo v New London 2005
Brown v Board 2nd 1955
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
49. You can burn the flag
Tinker v Des Moines 1969
Texas v Johnson 1989
Bush v Gore 2000
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
50. Halt to all death penalty punishments in nation until a less arbitrary method of sentencing was found
Furman v Georgia 1972
Weeks v US 1914
Roe v Wade 1973
Miller v California 1973