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. Selectively incorporates freedom of the press - prevents prior restraint -state injunctions to prevent publication unconstitutional
Lawrence v Texas 2003
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
Near v Minnesota 1931
Miller v California 1973
2. Overturned Olmstead - warrants were required to listen in on phone conversation
United States v Lopez 1995
Plessy v Ferguson 1896
Katz v US 1967
Baker v Carr 1962
3. Prohibited state-sponsored recitation of prayer in public schools
Engel v Vitale 1962
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
4. Threw out undergraduate system of selection - generally upheld Bakke
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
Gregg v Georgia 1976
Grutter & Gratz v Bollinger 2003
United States v Lopez 1995
5. Fighting words - certain offensive types of speech prohibited
Lloyd corporation v Tanner 1972
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
6. BSA could expel any homosexual member they wanted because of first amendment right of expressive association
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
Smith v Allwright 1944
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
7. Cities could legitimately require parade permits in the interest of pubic order (Jehovah's Witnesses march w/out permit)
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
Cox v New Hampshire 1941
Kelo v New London 2005
Near v Minnesota 1931
8. Separate is not equal
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
New York Times v US 1971
Grayned v City of rockford 1972
Grutter & Gratz v Bollinger 2003
9. Florida recount in 2000 election was a violation of fourteenth amendment's equal protection clause
Bush v Gore 2000
Gibbons v Ogden 1824
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
Gideon v Wainwright 1963
10. Established judicial review
Marbury v Madison 1803
Furman v Georgia 1972
US v Nixon 1974
Miller v California 1973
11. Not libel when they thought it was true at the time of printing
Brown v Board 2nd 1955
South Dakota v Dole 1987
Betts v Brady 1942
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
12. Established national abortion guidelines by extending inferred right of privacy from Griswold
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
Roe v Wade 1973
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
13. No such thing as executive privilege in criminal cases - but definitely at other times
US v Nixon 1974
Baker v Carr 1962
Barron v Baltimore 1819
Olmstead v US 1928
14. Prohibited states from banning teaching of evolution in public schools
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
Bush v Gore 2000
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
15. 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
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
Buckley v Baleo 1976
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
16. Race cannot be sole or predominant factor in redrawing legislative district boundaries (1982 VRA wants them to do that - though)
Weeks v US 1914
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
17. Forbids execution of defendants who are mentally retarded
Gregg v Georgia 1976
Kelo v New London 2005
Webster v Reproductive Health Services 1987
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
18. Ordered house districts to be near as equal as possible - enshrined principal of 'one man - one vote.'
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
Fletcher v Peck 1810
US v Eichman 1990
Oregon v Elstad 1985
19. 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
Lawrence v Texas 2003
Hustler Magazine v Falwell 1988
Miller v California 1973
Barron v Baltimore 1819
20. Legitimate use of eminent domain - town wanting to buy private land and turn it over to private developers
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
Baker v Carr 1962
Kelo v New London 2005
Dennis v US 1951
21. Mandated 21-year-old drinking age (if you don't feds will take away all federal highway funds
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
Oregon v Elstad 1985
South Dakota v Dole 1987
22. Forbids state-mandated bible reading
Bethel School district v Fraser 1986
Abington School District v Schempp 1963
Gregg v Georgia 1976
Lawrence v Texas 2003
23. Race-based affirmative action was permissible so long as it was in the service of creating greater diversity
Lawrence v Texas 2003
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
Gitlow v NY 1925
Dennis v US 1951
24. States cannot set term limits on members of congress
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
Woodson v North Carolina 1976
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
Roe v Wade 1973
25. Right to privacy
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
Dennis v US 1951
Webster v Reproductive Health Services 1987
26. Libel and obscenity not protected by first amendment - so three-part obscenity test established
Kelo v New London 2005
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
Weeks v US 1914
Miller v California 1973
27. Fed can limit speech that doesn't lead to action (upholding Smith Act - which made it a crime to support any communist organization)
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
Near v Minnesota 1931
Dennis v US 1951
28. Federal wiretaps of phone conversation is constitutional
Olmstead v US 1928
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
New York Times v US 1971
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
29. Halt to all death penalty punishments in nation until a less arbitrary method of sentencing was found
Powell v Alabama 1932
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
Grutter & Gratz v Bollinger 2003
Furman v Georgia 1972
30. All state governments must provide an attorney in all cases for those who can't afford one - powerful repudiation of Betts v Brady
Kelo v New London 2005
Gibbons v Ogden 1824
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
Gideon v Wainwright 1963
31. States not allowed to prevent or punish inflammatory speech unless it will lead to imminent lawless action
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
Brandenburg v Ohio 1969
Texas v Johnson 1989
Korematsu v US 1944
32. African Americans denied right to vote in primaries = violate fifteenth amendment
Smith v Allwright 1944
Roe v Wade 1973
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
Katz v US 1967
33. Executive efforts to prevent publication forbidden (Ellsburg & Vietnam)
New York Times v US 1971
Webster v Reproductive Health Services 1987
Brandenburg v Ohio 1969
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
34. First time court overturned state law on constitutional grounds.
Texas v Johnson 1989
Fletcher v Peck 1810
Engel v Vitale 1962
New York Times v US 1971
35. NC makes mandatory punishment for certain crimes - deemed unconstitutional
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
Furman v Georgia 1972
Woodson v North Carolina 1976
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
36. State prohibition of consensual sodomy in private is unreasonable invasion of privacy
Lawrence v Texas 2003
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
Abington School District v Schempp 1963
Korematsu v US 1944
37. FCRA mandated that places of public accommodation are prohibited from discrimination against blacks
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
Miller v California 1973
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
Cox v New Hampshire 1941
38. 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
Tinker v Des Moines 1969
Mapp v Ohio 1961
Gibbons v Ogden 1824
39. Confessions given immediately before rights are given means the confession is still admissible
Schenck v US 1919
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
Oregon v Elstad 1985
Betts v Brady 1942
40. All defendants must be informed of legal rights before they are arrested
Texas v Johnson 1989
Miranda v Arizona 1966
Schenck v US 1919
Powell v Alabama 1932
41. Protesters have substantially fewer assembly rights in malls and other private establishments
Brown v Board 2nd 1955
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
Betts v Brady 1942
Lloyd corporation v Tanner 1972
42. Segregate with al 'due and deliberate speed'
Brown v Board 2nd 1955
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
43. Demonstrations near schools that disrupted classes could be legally banned
Bush v Gore 2000
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
Grayned v City of rockford 1972
Betts v Brady 1942
44. Any defendant who asked for a lawyer had to have one granted to him - or any confession after that point is inadmissible
Olmstead v US 1928
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
45. 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
Oregon v Elstad 1985
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
Gregg v Georgia 1976
United States v Lopez 1995
46. Gave states more power to regulate abortion
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
New York Times v US 1971
Webster v Reproductive Health Services 1987
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
47. Overruled Powell - state govs do not have to provide lawyers to indigent defendants in capital cases
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
Olmstead v US 1928
Betts v Brady 1942
Kelo v New London 2005
48. Strikes by labor unions are constitutional
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
South Dakota v Dole 1987
Mapp v Ohio 1961
Hustler Magazine v Falwell 1988
49. Separate but equal for races
Lawrence v Texas 2003
Oregon v Elstad 1985
Plessy v Ferguson 1896
Smith v Allwright 1944
50. 'Bad Tendency Doctrine -' speech restricted if it has tendency to lead to illegal actions; selectively incorporated freedom of speech to states
Engel v Vitale 1962
Gitlow v NY 1925
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954