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. Right to privacy
Schenck v US 1919
Powell v Alabama 1932
Oregon v Elstad 1985
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
2. Extended exclusionary rule to the states
Mapp v Ohio 1961
Furman v Georgia 1972
Cox v New Hampshire 1941
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
3. All state governments must provide an attorney in all cases for those who can't afford one - powerful repudiation of Betts v Brady
Grutter & Gratz v Bollinger 2003
United States v Lopez 1995
Gideon v Wainwright 1963
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
4. 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
Grayned v City of rockford 1972
Texas v Johnson 1989
Lawrence v Texas 2003
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
5. Forbids execution of defendants who are mentally retarded
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
Bethel School district v Fraser 1986
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
Gregg v Georgia 1976
6. Prohibited states from banning teaching of evolution in public schools
US v Eichman 1990
Buckley v Baleo 1976
Fletcher v Peck 1810
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
7. Prohibited state-sponsored recitation of prayer in public schools
Roe v Wade 1973
US v Nixon 1974
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
Engel v Vitale 1962
8. NY could not grant steamship company monopoly - increased federal power over interstate commerce
Gibbons v Ogden 1824
Katz v US 1967
Dennis v US 1951
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
9. Commerce clause of the constitution does not give congress the power to regulate guns near state operated schools
Lloyd corporation v Tanner 1972
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
United States v Lopez 1995
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
10. Fighting words - certain offensive types of speech prohibited
Roe v Wade 1973
Dennis v US 1951
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
11. Any defendant who asked for a lawyer had to have one granted to him - or any confession after that point is inadmissible
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
Engel v Vitale 1962
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
12. Selectively incorporates freedom of the press - prevents prior restraint -state injunctions to prevent publication unconstitutional
Grutter & Gratz v Bollinger 2003
Lloyd corporation v Tanner 1972
Near v Minnesota 1931
Schenck v US 1919
13. Separate is not equal
Virginia v Black 2002
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
US v Eichman 1990
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
14. States did not have power to tax the national bank - reinforces supremacy clause
Miller v California 1973
Oregon v Elstad 1985
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
Fletcher v Peck 1810
15. Banned presidential use of a line=item veto as a violation of legislative powers.
Clinton v New York 1998
Bush v Gore 2000
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
Miranda v Arizona 1966
16. First time court overturned state law on constitutional grounds.
Fletcher v Peck 1810
Texas v Johnson 1989
Gibbons v Ogden 1824
Grutter & Gratz v Bollinger 2003
17. Overturned Olmstead - warrants were required to listen in on phone conversation
Miller v California 1973
Gregg v Georgia 1976
Katz v US 1967
Korematsu v US 1944
18. State govs must provide counsel in cases involving the death penalty to those who can't afford it
Powell v Alabama 1932
Hustler Magazine v Falwell 1988
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
Texas v Johnson 1989
19. Florida recount in 2000 election was a violation of fourteenth amendment's equal protection clause
Bush v Gore 2000
Brown v Board 2nd 1955
Gitlow v NY 1925
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
20. Not libel when they thought it was true at the time of printing
South Dakota v Dole 1987
Olmstead v US 1928
Smith v Allwright 1944
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
21. Race cannot be sole or predominant factor in redrawing legislative district boundaries (1982 VRA wants them to do that - though)
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
Miranda v Arizona 1966
Bush v Gore 2000
22. Citizens of Japanese descent could be interned and deprived of basic constitutional rights due to executive order
Katz v US 1967
Lawrence v Texas 2003
Gregg v Georgia 1976
Korematsu v US 1944
23. Clear and present danger (yelling fire) - Holmes
Schenck v US 1919
Dennis v US 1951
Powell v Alabama 1932
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
24. Forbids state-mandated bible reading
Abington School District v Schempp 1963
Marbury v Madison 1803
Smith v Allwright 1944
Miranda v Arizona 1966
25. You can burn the flag
Texas v Johnson 1989
Engel v Vitale 1962
Korematsu v US 1944
Woodson v North Carolina 1976
26. 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
Buckley v Baleo 1976
Lawrence v Texas 2003
Weeks v US 1914
United States v Lopez 1995
27. Segregate with al 'due and deliberate speed'
South Dakota v Dole 1987
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
Brown v Board 2nd 1955
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
28. Established judicial review
Marbury v Madison 1803
Buckley v Baleo 1976
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
29. BSA could expel any homosexual member they wanted because of first amendment right of expressive association
US v Nixon 1974
Grayned v City of rockford 1972
Smith v Allwright 1944
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
30. Fed can limit speech that doesn't lead to action (upholding Smith Act - which made it a crime to support any communist organization)
Barron v Baltimore 1819
Woodson v North Carolina 1976
Katz v US 1967
Dennis v US 1951
31. Students don't 'shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse door -' Iowa students suspended for wearing armbands to protest Vietnam war
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
Fletcher v Peck 1810
Oregon v Elstad 1985
Tinker v Des Moines 1969
32. No such thing as executive privilege in criminal cases - but definitely at other times
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
Woodson v North Carolina 1976
Gitlow v NY 1925
US v Nixon 1974
33. States cannot set term limits on members of congress
Abington School District v Schempp 1963
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
Brandenburg v Ohio 1969
34. Ordered house districts to be near as equal as possible - enshrined principal of 'one man - one vote.'
Fletcher v Peck 1810
Woodson v North Carolina 1976
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
US v Eichman 1990
35. States can regulate abortion but not with regulations that impose an 'undue burden' on women
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
US v Nixon 1974
Baker v Carr 1962
36. Secular rather than religious purpose? neither promote nor discourage religion? avoid 'excessive entanglement?'
New York Times v US 1971
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
Engel v Vitale 1962
Weeks v US 1914
37. Cities could legitimately require parade permits in the interest of pubic order (Jehovah's Witnesses march w/out permit)
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
Betts v Brady 1942
Korematsu v US 1944
Cox v New Hampshire 1941
38. Protesters have substantially fewer assembly rights in malls and other private establishments
Barron v Baltimore 1819
Katz v US 1967
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
Lloyd corporation v Tanner 1972
39. Confessions given immediately before rights are given means the confession is still admissible
Kelo v New London 2005
Oregon v Elstad 1985
US v Eichman 1990
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
40. NC makes mandatory punishment for certain crimes - deemed unconstitutional
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
Lloyd corporation v Tanner 1972
Woodson v North Carolina 1976
Bush v Gore 2000
41. All defendants must be informed of legal rights before they are arrested
Miranda v Arizona 1966
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
US v Eichman 1990
Korematsu v US 1944
42. Federal courts = final authority on creation of house districts
Miranda v Arizona 1966
Baker v Carr 1962
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
Cox v New Hampshire 1941
43. Invalidated 1989 Flag Protection Act
Lloyd corporation v Tanner 1972
US v Nixon 1974
Virginia v Black 2002
US v Eichman 1990
44. Legitimate use of eminent domain - town wanting to buy private land and turn it over to private developers
United States v Lopez 1995
US v Eichman 1990
Kelo v New London 2005
Plessy v Ferguson 1896
45. Parents may remove children from public school for religious reasons
South Dakota v Dole 1987
Clinton v New York 1998
Marbury v Madison 1803
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
46. Executive efforts to prevent publication forbidden (Ellsburg & Vietnam)
Near v Minnesota 1931
New York Times v US 1971
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
47. State prohibition of consensual sodomy in private is unreasonable invasion of privacy
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
Virginia v Black 2002
Lawrence v Texas 2003
Olmstead v US 1928
48. Gave states more power to regulate abortion
Brandenburg v Ohio 1969
Webster v Reproductive Health Services 1987
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
Fletcher v Peck 1810
49. Strikes by labor unions are constitutional
Texas v Johnson 1989
South Dakota v Dole 1987
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
50. Established national abortion guidelines by extending inferred right of privacy from Griswold
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
Roe v Wade 1973
New York Times v US 1971
Korematsu v US 1944