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. Legitimate use of eminent domain - town wanting to buy private land and turn it over to private developers
Kelo v New London 2005
Smith v Allwright 1944
Dennis v US 1951
Barron v Baltimore 1819
2. States can regulate abortion but not with regulations that impose an 'undue burden' on women
US v Eichman 1990
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
Roe v Wade 1973
Dennis v US 1951
3. Secular rather than religious purpose? neither promote nor discourage religion? avoid 'excessive entanglement?'
Engel v Vitale 1962
Virginia v Black 2002
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
4. Forbids execution of defendants who are mentally retarded
Oregon v Elstad 1985
Baker v Carr 1962
Gregg v Georgia 1976
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
5. Demonstrations near schools that disrupted classes could be legally banned
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
Furman v Georgia 1972
Grayned v City of rockford 1972
Cox v New Hampshire 1941
6. Gave states more power to regulate abortion
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
Webster v Reproductive Health Services 1987
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
7. State govs must provide counsel in cases involving the death penalty to those who can't afford it
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
Weeks v US 1914
Powell v Alabama 1932
8. Established national abortion guidelines by extending inferred right of privacy from Griswold
Miller v California 1973
Lloyd corporation v Tanner 1972
Roe v Wade 1973
US v Eichman 1990
9. Mandated 21-year-old drinking age (if you don't feds will take away all federal highway funds
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
South Dakota v Dole 1987
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
10. Any defendant who asked for a lawyer had to have one granted to him - or any confession after that point is inadmissible
Gibbons v Ogden 1824
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
Plessy v Ferguson 1896
Smith v Allwright 1944
11. Race cannot be sole or predominant factor in redrawing legislative district boundaries (1982 VRA wants them to do that - though)
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
Gitlow v NY 1925
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
12. Established exclusionary rule
Oregon v Elstad 1985
Schenck v US 1919
Powell v Alabama 1932
Weeks v US 1914
13. 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
Weeks v US 1914
Hustler Magazine v Falwell 1988
Abington School District v Schempp 1963
Dennis v US 1951
14. 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
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
Barron v Baltimore 1819
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
15. Confessions given immediately before rights are given means the confession is still admissible
Korematsu v US 1944
Weeks v US 1914
Oregon v Elstad 1985
Betts v Brady 1942
16. Race-based affirmative action was permissible so long as it was in the service of creating greater diversity
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
Webster v Reproductive Health Services 1987
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
17. All defendants must be informed of legal rights before they are arrested
United States v Lopez 1995
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
Woodson v North Carolina 1976
Miranda v Arizona 1966
18. '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
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
Roe v Wade 1973
Miranda v Arizona 1966
19. Florida recount in 2000 election was a violation of fourteenth amendment's equal protection clause
Bush v Gore 2000
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
Brown v Board 2nd 1955
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
20. FCRA mandated that places of public accommodation are prohibited from discrimination against blacks
Near v Minnesota 1931
Fletcher v Peck 1810
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
21. Prohibited states from banning teaching of evolution in public schools
Barron v Baltimore 1819
Smith v Allwright 1944
Weeks v US 1914
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
22. States not allowed to prevent or punish inflammatory speech unless it will lead to imminent lawless action
Brandenburg v Ohio 1969
Roe v Wade 1973
Abington School District v Schempp 1963
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
23. Peaceable assembly for lawful discussion cannot be made a crime - selectively incorporated right to lawful assembly to all state governments
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
Virginia v Black 2002
Oregon v Elstad 1985
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
24. Students don't 'shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse door -' Iowa students suspended for wearing armbands to protest Vietnam war
Tinker v Des Moines 1969
Hustler Magazine v Falwell 1988
Katz v US 1967
Roe v Wade 1973
25. Not libel when they thought it was true at the time of printing
Kelo v New London 2005
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
Clinton v New York 1998
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
26. NY could not grant steamship company monopoly - increased federal power over interstate commerce
Engel v Vitale 1962
Gibbons v Ogden 1824
Plessy v Ferguson 1896
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
27. Selectively incorporates freedom of the press - prevents prior restraint -state injunctions to prevent publication unconstitutional
Near v Minnesota 1931
Katz v US 1967
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
Gitlow v NY 1925
28. Made the CRA 1964 apply to virtually all businesses
Grayned v City of rockford 1972
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
Near v Minnesota 1931
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
29. Cross burning = 'fighting words' = unconstitutional
Virginia v Black 2002
Bethel School district v Fraser 1986
South Dakota v Dole 1987
Barron v Baltimore 1819
30. School district can suspend students for lewd or indecent speech
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
Oregon v Elstad 1985
Kelo v New London 2005
Bethel School district v Fraser 1986
31. Clear and present danger (yelling fire) - Holmes
Schenck v US 1919
Gregg v Georgia 1976
Miller v California 1973
US v Eichman 1990
32. No such thing as executive privilege in criminal cases - but definitely at other times
US v Nixon 1974
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
Tinker v Des Moines 1969
Brown v Board 2nd 1955
33. BSA could expel any homosexual member they wanted because of first amendment right of expressive association
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
Schenck v US 1919
34. Right to privacy
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
Plessy v Ferguson 1896
Brandenburg v Ohio 1969
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
35. Established judicial review
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
US v Eichman 1990
Marbury v Madison 1803
Hustler Magazine v Falwell 1988
36. Ordered house districts to be near as equal as possible - enshrined principal of 'one man - one vote.'
Oregon v Elstad 1985
Schenck v US 1919
Webster v Reproductive Health Services 1987
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
37. Strikes by labor unions are constitutional
Gregg v Georgia 1976
Texas v Johnson 1989
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
US v Eichman 1990
38. Citizens of Japanese descent could be interned and deprived of basic constitutional rights due to executive order
Korematsu v US 1944
US v Eichman 1990
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
Tinker v Des Moines 1969
39. Cities could legitimately require parade permits in the interest of pubic order (Jehovah's Witnesses march w/out permit)
Brown v Board 2nd 1955
Cox v New Hampshire 1941
Barron v Baltimore 1819
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
40. Invalidated 1989 Flag Protection Act
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
US v Eichman 1990
Hustler Magazine v Falwell 1988
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
41. State prohibition of consensual sodomy in private is unreasonable invasion of privacy
Lloyd corporation v Tanner 1972
Lawrence v Texas 2003
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
Schenck v US 1919
42. Libel and obscenity not protected by first amendment - so three-part obscenity test established
Engel v Vitale 1962
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
Miller v California 1973
43. States cannot set term limits on members of congress
US v Eichman 1990
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
44. Separate is not equal
Brandenburg v Ohio 1969
Brown v Board 2nd 1955
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
Gideon v Wainwright 1963
45. NC makes mandatory punishment for certain crimes - deemed unconstitutional
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
Miller v California 1973
Woodson v North Carolina 1976
US v Eichman 1990
46. Parents may remove children from public school for religious reasons
Bethel School district v Fraser 1986
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
Abington School District v Schempp 1963
47. Overruled Powell - state govs do not have to provide lawyers to indigent defendants in capital cases
Betts v Brady 1942
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
Furman v Georgia 1972
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
48. Halt to all death penalty punishments in nation until a less arbitrary method of sentencing was found
Brandenburg v Ohio 1969
Miller v California 1973
Furman v Georgia 1972
Abington School District v Schempp 1963
49. 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
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
Virginia v Black 2002
South Dakota v Dole 1987
50. Banned presidential use of a line=item veto as a violation of legislative powers.
Gregg v Georgia 1976
Clinton v New York 1998
Abington School District v Schempp 1963
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
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