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
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
Mapp v Ohio 1961
Gibbons v Ogden 1824
2. First time court overturned state law on constitutional grounds.
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
Fletcher v Peck 1810
Miller v California 1973
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
3. Strikes by labor unions are constitutional
Brandenburg v Ohio 1969
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
Powell v Alabama 1932
Barron v Baltimore 1819
4. Confessions given immediately before rights are given means the confession is still admissible
Oregon v Elstad 1985
Brandenburg v Ohio 1969
Bethel School district v Fraser 1986
Engel v Vitale 1962
5. Overruled Powell - state govs do not have to provide lawyers to indigent defendants in capital cases
Betts v Brady 1942
Furman v Georgia 1972
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
Texas v Johnson 1989
6. Forbids execution of defendants who are mentally retarded
Hustler Magazine v Falwell 1988
Gregg v Georgia 1976
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
7. Commerce clause of the constitution does not give congress the power to regulate guns near state operated schools
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
United States v Lopez 1995
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
8. 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
Hustler Magazine v Falwell 1988
Tinker v Des Moines 1969
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
9. 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
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
Engel v Vitale 1962
Buckley v Baleo 1976
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
10. BSA could expel any homosexual member they wanted because of first amendment right of expressive association
Gitlow v NY 1925
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
Lloyd corporation v Tanner 1972
11. Banned presidential use of a line=item veto as a violation of legislative powers.
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
Korematsu v US 1944
Kelo v New London 2005
Clinton v New York 1998
12. School district can suspend students for lewd or indecent speech
Cox v New Hampshire 1941
Gregg v Georgia 1976
Bethel School district v Fraser 1986
New York Times v US 1971
13. Established national abortion guidelines by extending inferred right of privacy from Griswold
Powell v Alabama 1932
Roe v Wade 1973
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
14. Selectively incorporates freedom of the press - prevents prior restraint -state injunctions to prevent publication unconstitutional
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
Near v Minnesota 1931
Miller v California 1973
Lawrence v Texas 2003
15. Executive efforts to prevent publication forbidden (Ellsburg & Vietnam)
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
Oregon v Elstad 1985
New York Times v US 1971
Tinker v Des Moines 1969
16. Halt to all death penalty punishments in nation until a less arbitrary method of sentencing was found
Plessy v Ferguson 1896
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
Furman v Georgia 1972
Korematsu v US 1944
17. Ordered house districts to be near as equal as possible - enshrined principal of 'one man - one vote.'
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
Buckley v Baleo 1976
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
18. States did not have power to tax the national bank - reinforces supremacy clause
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
Gibbons v Ogden 1824
Smith v Allwright 1944
Marbury v Madison 1803
19. State prohibition of consensual sodomy in private is unreasonable invasion of privacy
Lawrence v Texas 2003
Engel v Vitale 1962
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
20. Established judicial review
Marbury v Madison 1803
US v Eichman 1990
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
Grayned v City of rockford 1972
21. Prohibited state-sponsored recitation of prayer in public schools
Gregg v Georgia 1976
Engel v Vitale 1962
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
22. Extended exclusionary rule to the states
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
Mapp v Ohio 1961
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
23. Parents may remove children from public school for religious reasons
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
Olmstead v US 1928
Katz v US 1967
24. 'Bad Tendency Doctrine -' speech restricted if it has tendency to lead to illegal actions; selectively incorporated freedom of speech to states
Weeks v US 1914
Roe v Wade 1973
Gitlow v NY 1925
South Dakota v Dole 1987
25. All state governments must provide an attorney in all cases for those who can't afford one - powerful repudiation of Betts v Brady
Miller v California 1973
Baker v Carr 1962
Gitlow v NY 1925
Gideon v Wainwright 1963
26. Cities could legitimately require parade permits in the interest of pubic order (Jehovah's Witnesses march w/out permit)
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
Grutter & Gratz v Bollinger 2003
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
Cox v New Hampshire 1941
27. Not libel when they thought it was true at the time of printing
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
Grutter & Gratz v Bollinger 2003
Smith v Allwright 1944
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
28. Separate is not equal
Tinker v Des Moines 1969
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
Buckley v Baleo 1976
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
29. Gave states more power to regulate abortion
Smith v Allwright 1944
Webster v Reproductive Health Services 1987
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
30. Right to privacy
Clinton v New York 1998
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
Bethel School district v Fraser 1986
31. FCRA mandated that places of public accommodation are prohibited from discrimination against blacks
Gibbons v Ogden 1824
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
United States v Lopez 1995
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
32. Fighting words - certain offensive types of speech prohibited
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
United States v Lopez 1995
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
33. Fed can limit speech that doesn't lead to action (upholding Smith Act - which made it a crime to support any communist organization)
Dennis v US 1951
Buckley v Baleo 1976
Texas v Johnson 1989
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
34. Secular rather than religious purpose? neither promote nor discourage religion? avoid 'excessive entanglement?'
Brandenburg v Ohio 1969
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
Marbury v Madison 1803
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
35. NY could not grant steamship company monopoly - increased federal power over interstate commerce
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
Gibbons v Ogden 1824
Smith v Allwright 1944
36. Mandated 21-year-old drinking age (if you don't feds will take away all federal highway funds
South Dakota v Dole 1987
Gideon v Wainwright 1963
Furman v Georgia 1972
Engel v Vitale 1962
37. States can regulate abortion but not with regulations that impose an 'undue burden' on women
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
Fletcher v Peck 1810
Korematsu v US 1944
Baker v Carr 1962
38. 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
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
Brown v Board 2nd 1955
39. Demonstrations near schools that disrupted classes could be legally banned
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
Miranda v Arizona 1966
Grayned v City of rockford 1972
Marbury v Madison 1803
40. Prohibited states from banning teaching of evolution in public schools
Olmstead v US 1928
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
Woodson v North Carolina 1976
41. You can burn the flag
New York Times v US 1971
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
Texas v Johnson 1989
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
42. Separate but equal for races
Gideon v Wainwright 1963
Bethel School district v Fraser 1986
Plessy v Ferguson 1896
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
43. Federal wiretaps of phone conversation is constitutional
Powell v Alabama 1932
Smith v Allwright 1944
Olmstead v US 1928
Buckley v Baleo 1976
44. All defendants must be informed of legal rights before they are arrested
Miranda v Arizona 1966
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
Dennis v US 1951
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
45. Made the CRA 1964 apply to virtually all businesses
Lloyd corporation v Tanner 1972
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
Grutter & Gratz v Bollinger 2003
US v Nixon 1974
46. 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
United States v Lopez 1995
Buckley v Baleo 1976
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
47. Clear and present danger (yelling fire) - Holmes
Schenck v US 1919
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
Furman v Georgia 1972
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
48. Cross burning = 'fighting words' = unconstitutional
Virginia v Black 2002
Grayned v City of rockford 1972
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
New York Times v US 1971
49. Established exclusionary rule
Weeks v US 1914
Schenck v US 1919
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
50. Any defendant who asked for a lawyer had to have one granted to him - or any confession after that point is inadmissible
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
Weeks v US 1914
Virginia v Black 2002
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
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