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. Race-based affirmative action was permissible so long as it was in the service of creating greater diversity
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
2. Legitimate use of eminent domain - town wanting to buy private land and turn it over to private developers
Gregg v Georgia 1976
Texas v Johnson 1989
South Dakota v Dole 1987
Kelo v New London 2005
3. '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
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
Kelo v New London 2005
4. Parents may remove children from public school for religious reasons
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
US v Nixon 1974
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
Fletcher v Peck 1810
5. Federal wiretaps of phone conversation is constitutional
Weeks v US 1914
Miller v California 1973
Olmstead v US 1928
Oregon v Elstad 1985
6. Florida recount in 2000 election was a violation of fourteenth amendment's equal protection clause
Korematsu v US 1944
Bush v Gore 2000
New York Times v US 1971
Roe v Wade 1973
7. You can burn the flag
Miranda v Arizona 1966
Texas v Johnson 1989
Betts v Brady 1942
Kelo v New London 2005
8. Fighting words - certain offensive types of speech prohibited
Hustler Magazine v Falwell 1988
Woodson v North Carolina 1976
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
Roe v Wade 1973
9. Ordered house districts to be near as equal as possible - enshrined principal of 'one man - one vote.'
Bethel School district v Fraser 1986
Engel v Vitale 1962
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
10. Prohibited states from banning teaching of evolution in public schools
Grutter & Gratz v Bollinger 2003
Baker v Carr 1962
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
11. Halt to all death penalty punishments in nation until a less arbitrary method of sentencing was found
South Dakota v Dole 1987
Gitlow v NY 1925
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
Furman v Georgia 1972
12. States can regulate abortion but not with regulations that impose an 'undue burden' on women
Grayned v City of rockford 1972
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
Cox v New Hampshire 1941
Barron v Baltimore 1819
13. Separate but equal for races
United States v Lopez 1995
Fletcher v Peck 1810
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
Plessy v Ferguson 1896
14. Banned presidential use of a line=item veto as a violation of legislative powers.
Texas v Johnson 1989
Dennis v US 1951
Clinton v New York 1998
Mapp v Ohio 1961
15. Extended exclusionary rule to the states
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
Smith v Allwright 1944
Mapp v Ohio 1961
16. Not libel when they thought it was true at the time of printing
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
US v Nixon 1974
Barron v Baltimore 1819
17. Clear and present danger (yelling fire) - Holmes
Virginia v Black 2002
Smith v Allwright 1944
Schenck v US 1919
Cox v New Hampshire 1941
18. Commerce clause of the constitution does not give congress the power to regulate guns near state operated schools
Webster v Reproductive Health Services 1987
Engel v Vitale 1962
United States v Lopez 1995
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
19. Race cannot be sole or predominant factor in redrawing legislative district boundaries (1982 VRA wants them to do that - though)
Bethel School district v Fraser 1986
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
Furman v Georgia 1972
Oregon v Elstad 1985
20. Any defendant who asked for a lawyer had to have one granted to him - or any confession after that point is inadmissible
Buckley v Baleo 1976
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
Engel v Vitale 1962
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
21. Libel and obscenity not protected by first amendment - so three-part obscenity test established
Weeks v US 1914
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
Fletcher v Peck 1810
Miller v California 1973
22. Peaceable assembly for lawful discussion cannot be made a crime - selectively incorporated right to lawful assembly to all state governments
Smith v Allwright 1944
Buckley v Baleo 1976
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
Miller v California 1973
23. Students don't 'shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse door -' Iowa students suspended for wearing armbands to protest Vietnam war
Miranda v Arizona 1966
Buckley v Baleo 1976
Schenck v US 1919
Tinker v Des Moines 1969
24. Established national abortion guidelines by extending inferred right of privacy from Griswold
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
US v Nixon 1974
Roe v Wade 1973
Miller v California 1973
25. Invalidated 1989 Flag Protection Act
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
Gregg v Georgia 1976
US v Eichman 1990
Lawrence v Texas 2003
26. All state governments must provide an attorney in all cases for those who can't afford one - powerful repudiation of Betts v Brady
Brown v Board 2nd 1955
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
Gideon v Wainwright 1963
27. Made the CRA 1964 apply to virtually all businesses
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
Gideon v Wainwright 1963
Hustler Magazine v Falwell 1988
28. School district can suspend students for lewd or indecent speech
Plessy v Ferguson 1896
Bethel School district v Fraser 1986
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
Near v Minnesota 1931
29. Fed can limit speech that doesn't lead to action (upholding Smith Act - which made it a crime to support any communist organization)
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
Bethel School district v Fraser 1986
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
Dennis v US 1951
30. States not allowed to prevent or punish inflammatory speech unless it will lead to imminent lawless action
Brandenburg v Ohio 1969
Buckley v Baleo 1976
Woodson v North Carolina 1976
Lloyd corporation v Tanner 1972
31. Segregate with al 'due and deliberate speed'
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
Brown v Board 2nd 1955
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
32. Threw out undergraduate system of selection - generally upheld Bakke
Smith v Allwright 1944
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
Texas v Johnson 1989
Grutter & Gratz v Bollinger 2003
33. 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
Plessy v Ferguson 1896
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
Betts v Brady 1942
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
34. Strikes by labor unions are constitutional
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
35. Protesters have substantially fewer assembly rights in malls and other private establishments
Engel v Vitale 1962
Lloyd corporation v Tanner 1972
Webster v Reproductive Health Services 1987
Cox v New Hampshire 1941
36. No such thing as executive privilege in criminal cases - but definitely at other times
US v Nixon 1974
Korematsu v US 1944
Oregon v Elstad 1985
Weeks v US 1914
37. Overturned Olmstead - warrants were required to listen in on phone conversation
Katz v US 1967
Abington School District v Schempp 1963
Gideon v Wainwright 1963
New York Times v US 1971
38. Federal courts = final authority on creation of house districts
Mapp v Ohio 1961
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
Baker v Carr 1962
Woodson v North Carolina 1976
39. States did not have power to tax the national bank - reinforces supremacy clause
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
Oregon v Elstad 1985
Cox v New Hampshire 1941
40. Separate is not equal
Bush v Gore 2000
Texas v Johnson 1989
South Dakota v Dole 1987
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
41. Secular rather than religious purpose? neither promote nor discourage religion? avoid 'excessive entanglement?'
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
Kelo v New London 2005
South Dakota v Dole 1987
42. Cities could legitimately require parade permits in the interest of pubic order (Jehovah's Witnesses march w/out permit)
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
Bethel School district v Fraser 1986
Tinker v Des Moines 1969
Cox v New Hampshire 1941
43. African Americans denied right to vote in primaries = violate fifteenth amendment
Near v Minnesota 1931
Smith v Allwright 1944
Powell v Alabama 1932
Miller v California 1973
44. Gave states more power to regulate abortion
Oregon v Elstad 1985
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
Webster v Reproductive Health Services 1987
45. Overruled Powell - state govs do not have to provide lawyers to indigent defendants in capital cases
Dennis v US 1951
US v Eichman 1990
Betts v Brady 1942
Oregon v Elstad 1985
46. Demonstrations near schools that disrupted classes could be legally banned
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
Powell v Alabama 1932
Grayned v City of rockford 1972
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
47. 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
Marbury v Madison 1803
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
Barron v Baltimore 1819
48. 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
Texas v Johnson 1989
Buckley v Baleo 1976
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
Gibbons v Ogden 1824
49. Cross burning = 'fighting words' = unconstitutional
Miranda v Arizona 1966
Virginia v Black 2002
Brandenburg v Ohio 1969
Engel v Vitale 1962
50. State govs must provide counsel in cases involving the death penalty to those who can't afford it
Powell v Alabama 1932
Barron v Baltimore 1819
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
Gitlow v NY 1925
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