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 Supreme Court Cases
Start Test
Study First
Subject
:
law
Instructions:
Answer 46 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. The result of this trial was the Supreme Court ruling that Congress could limit free speech - particularly during wartime - if such speech presented 'a clear and present danger' to national interests
Buckley v. Valeo
Schnek v United States
Harris v Forklift Service
Wolf v Colorado
2. Right to Counsel during Interrogations
Regents of the University of California v Bakke
Escobedo v Ilinois
Gitlow v United States
Plessy v Ferguson
3. (1942) The Court ruled that the first amendment did not protect 'fighting words'
Santa Fe Independant School District v Doe
Plessy v Ferguson
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire
Katz v United States
4. Free exercise of religion not violation of compulsory attendance laws; Amish children do not have to go to school until they are 16---they may stop after the 8th grade
Texas v Johnson
Korematsu v United States
Palko v Connecticut
Wisconsin v Yoder
5. Court held that intentional infliction of emotional distress was permissible First Amendment free speech- so long as such speech was about a public official (figure) - and could not reasonably be construed to state actual facts about its subject
Korematsu v United States
NAACP v Alabama
Hustler Magazine v Falwell
Wolf v Colorado
6. The Supreme Court held that the 1996 Communications Decency Act was unconstitutional - since it was overly broad and vague in its regulation of speech on the internet - and it attempted to regulate indecent speech - which is protected.
Brown v Board of Education
Adarand v Pena
Reno v ACLU
Wisconsin v Yoder
7. The Fourteenth Amendment did not impose specific limitations on criminal justice in the states - and that illegally obtained evidence did not necessarily have to be excluded from trials in all cases.
Korematsu v United States
Wolf v Colorado
Bush v Gore
Miller v California
8. Supreme Court held that criminal suspects must be informed of their right to consult with an attorney and of their right against self-incrimination prior to questioning by police.
United States v Eichman
Miranda v Arizona
Barron v Baltimore
Adarand v Pena
9. Affirmative action case (lost) ; race could be used as a factor in admissions as long as there was no point system and race was not a major factor; upheld Bakke case
New York Times v Sullivan
Boy Scouts of America v Dale
Buckley v. Valeo
Grutter v Bollinger
10. A 1957 Supreme Court decision ruling that obscenity is not within the area of constitutionally protected speech or press.
Wolf v Colorado
Webster v Health Reproductive Service
Roth v United States
Village of Skokie v National Socialist Party
11. 1925 court decision holding that freedoms of press and speech are 'fundamental personal rights protected by the due process clause of the 14Th amendment from impairment by the states as well as the federal government
Adarand v Pena
Gitlow v United States
Escobedo v Ilinois
Griswold v Connecticut
12. Established the exclusionary rule was applicable to the states (evidence seized illegally cannot be used in court)
Mapp v Ohio
Gitlow v United States
Grutter v Bollinger
Brown v Board of Education
13. Upheld the death penalty was NOT cruel and unusual punishment
Roe v Wade
Wolf v Colorado
Miranda v Arizona
Gregg v Georgia
14. Using the commerce clause as justification for this federal government ruling - aid that places of public acccommodation cannot pick and choose guests
Engel v Vitale
Heart of Atlanta Motel v United States
Korematsu v United States
Texas v Johnson
15. Student led - student initiated prayer at high school football games violates the Establishment Clause
Gideon v Wainwright
Korematsu v United States
Santa Fe Independant School District v Doe
Tinker v Des Moines School District
16. 1964; established guidelines for determining whether public officials and public figures could win damage suits for libel. To do so - individuals must prove that the defamatory statements were made w/ 'actual malice' and reckless disregard for the tr
Plessy v Ferguson
Tinker v Des Moines School District
Buckley v. Valeo
New York Times v Sullivan
17. The supreme court protected the right to assemble peaceably in this 1958 case when it decided the NAACP did not have to reveal its membership list and thus subject its members to harassment.
Palko v Connecticut
NAACP v Alabama
New York Times v Sullivan
Regents of the University of California v Bakke
18. Sexual harassment not protected by First Amendment Rights
Gideon v Wainwright
Roe v Wade
Hustler Magazine v Falwell
Harris v Forklift Service
19. Expanded the protection of the Fourth Amendment to include conversations - not just things.
Adarand v Pena
Korematsu v United States
Engel v Vitale
Katz v United States
20. 1978 - Nazi group wanted to mark in neighborhood with high percentage of Jewish residents; village tried to prevent march by passing ordinances on parades that targeted the nazis; Illinois Supreme Court said march could not be forbidden because no on
Wisconsin v Yoder
Wolf v Colorado
Village of Skokie v National Socialist Party
Hustler Magazine v Falwell
21. Said that protection against double jeopardy is not guaranteed in the Fourteenth Amendment.
Katz v United States
Tinker v Des Moines School District
Palko v Connecticut
Roe v Wade
22. A 1973 Supreme Court decision that avoided defining obscenity by holding that community standards be used to determine whether material is obscene in terms of appealing to a 'prurient interest' and being 'patently offensive' and lacking in value.
Miller v California
Village of Skokie v National Socialist Party
Gideon v Wainwright
Regents of the University of California v Bakke
23. A landmark case in United States Supreme Court history. In the case - the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that state courts are required under the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution to provide counsel in criminal cases for defendants unable to affor
Katz v United States
Miller v California
Roe v Wade
Gideon v Wainwright
24. 1969 - The First Amendment - as applied through the Fourteenth - did not permit a public school to punish a student for wearing a black armband as an anti-war protest - absent any evidence that the rule was necessary to avoid substantial interference
United States v Eichman
Bush v Gore
Tinker v Des Moines School District
Wolf v Colorado
25. This case ruled in favor of Bush by saying that recounting the votes in certain counties of Florida was unconstitutional because of equal protection of the law; Gore's wish to make the process as simple and painless as possible backfired
Bush v Gore
Griswold v Connecticut
Adarand v Pena
Texas v Johnson
26. Court found that segregation was a violation of the Equal Protection clause 'separate but equal' has no place
Brown v Board of Education
Texas v Johnson
Lemon v Kurtzman
Employment Division v Smith
27. Married couple wanted to get contraceptives; struck down a Connecticut law prohibiting the sale of contraceptives; established the right of privacy through the 4th and 9th amendment
Swann v Charlotte-Mecklingberg
Grutter v Bollinger
Griswold v Connecticut
Casey v Planned Parenthood
28. Busing Students to promote intergration is constitutional.
Webster v Health Reproductive Service
Swann v Charlotte-Mecklingberg
Gitlow v United States
Roth v United States
29. Established national abortion guidelines; trimester guidelines; no state interference in 1st; state may regulate to protect health of mother in 2nd; state may regulate to protect health or unborn child in 3rd. inferred from right of privacy establish
Roe v Wade
Mapp v Ohio
Reno v ACLU
Bush v Gore
30. 1944 Supreme Court case where the Supreme Court upheld the order providing for the relocation of Japanese Americans. It was not until 1988 that Congress formally apologized and agreed to pay $20 -000 to each survivor.
Korematsu v United States
Roth v United States
Texas v Johnson
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire
31. Law must be clearly secular - not prohibiting or inhibiting religion - and there should be no excessive entanglement
Gitlow v United States
Roe v Wade
Lemon v Kurtzman
Katz v United States
32. The 1833 Supreme Court decision holding that the bill of rights restrained only the national government - not the states and cities.
Schnek v United States
Barron v Baltimore
Wolf v Colorado
New York Times v Sullivan
33. Declared Flag Protection Act - which made flag-burning illegal - unconstitutional - 1990
Gideon v Wainwright
Roth v United States
United States v Eichman
Plessy v Ferguson
34. The USSC uphold MO law and insists that women have a right to abortion but state should not pay 'elective surgery'
Wolf v Colorado
Near v Minnesota
Webster v Health Reproductive Service
Miranda v Arizona
35. The 1962 Supreme Court decision holding that state officials violated the First Amendment when they wrote a prayer to be recited by New York's schoolchildren.
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire
Santa Fe Independant School District v Doe
Engel v Vitale
Texas v Johnson
36. Husband permission for abortion is unconstitutional (1992)
Schnek v United States
Buckley v. Valeo
Village of Skokie v National Socialist Party
Casey v Planned Parenthood
37. The 1931 Supreme Court decision holding that the first amendment protects newspapers from prior restraint.
Village of Skokie v National Socialist Party
Plessy v Ferguson
Near v Minnesota
Texas v Johnson
38. In this case - a gay man from Georgia charged with committing sodomy in his own home with a consenting adult. The court ruled that the Constitution does not explicitly grant the right for homosexuals to practice their lifestyle and that laws against
Bowers v Hardwick
Hustler Magazine v Falwell
Swann v Charlotte-Mecklingberg
Barron v Baltimore
39. A case in which the Supreme Court of the United States upheld federal limits on campaign contributions and ruled that spending money to influence elections is a form of constitutionally protected free speech. The court also stated candidates can give
Plessy v Ferguson
Buckley v. Valeo
Santa Fe Independant School District v Doe
Brown v Board of Education
40. A 1896 Supreme Court decision which legalized state ordered segregation so long as the facilities for blacks and whites were equal
Plessy v Ferguson
Gitlow v United States
Reno v ACLU
Boy Scouts of America v Dale
41. Less blatant gerrymandering and redistricting was subject to judicial approval
Palko v Connecticut
Barron v Baltimore
Baker v Car
Reno v ACLU
42. A 1989 case in which the Supreme Court struck down a law banning the burning of the American flag on the grounds that such action was symbolic speech protected by the First Amendment.
Texas v Johnson
Hustler Magazine v Falwell
Gideon v Wainwright
Near v Minnesota
43. First Amendment right of expressive association. BSA is allowed to dismiss gay leaders because it is a private institution
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire
Buckley v. Valeo
Palko v Connecticut
Boy Scouts of America v Dale
44. Courts held while that affirmative action systems are constitutional - a quota system based on race is unconstitutional.
Palko v Connecticut
Korematsu v United States
Regents of the University of California v Bakke
Bush v Gore
45. Determined that the state could deny unemployment benefits to a person fired for violating a state prohibition on the use of peyote - even though the use of the drug was part of a religious ritual. Although states have the power to accommodate otherw
Barron v Baltimore
Roe v Wade
Near v Minnesota
Employment Division v Smith
46. A 1995 Supreme Court decision holding that federal programs that classify people by race - even for an ostensibly benign purpose such as expanding opportunities for minorities - should be presumed to be unconstitutional.
Adarand v Pena
Roe v Wade
Escobedo v Ilinois
Miller v California