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
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
Hustler Magazine v Falwell 1988
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
Woodson v North Carolina 1976
2. All state governments must provide an attorney in all cases for those who can't afford one - powerful repudiation of Betts v Brady
Smith v Allwright 1944
Gideon v Wainwright 1963
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
Near v Minnesota 1931
3. Ordered house districts to be near as equal as possible - enshrined principal of 'one man - one vote.'
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
Marbury v Madison 1803
Korematsu v US 1944
4. Mandated 21-year-old drinking age (if you don't feds will take away all federal highway funds
Gregg v Georgia 1976
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
South Dakota v Dole 1987
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
5. Prohibited state-sponsored recitation of prayer in public schools
Kelo v New London 2005
Engel v Vitale 1962
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
6. Peaceable assembly for lawful discussion cannot be made a crime - selectively incorporated right to lawful assembly to all state governments
Bush v Gore 2000
Clinton v New York 1998
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
Buckley v Baleo 1976
7. State prohibition of consensual sodomy in private is unreasonable invasion of privacy
Lawrence v Texas 2003
New York Times v US 1971
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
Gibbons v Ogden 1824
8. Clear and present danger (yelling fire) - Holmes
United States v Lopez 1995
Schenck v US 1919
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
Gitlow v NY 1925
9. Established national abortion guidelines by extending inferred right of privacy from Griswold
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
South Dakota v Dole 1987
Roe v Wade 1973
10. Extended exclusionary rule to the states
Kelo v New London 2005
Hustler Magazine v Falwell 1988
Mapp v Ohio 1961
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
11. School district can suspend students for lewd or indecent speech
Lloyd corporation v Tanner 1972
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
Bethel School district v Fraser 1986
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
12. You can burn the flag
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
Lawrence v Texas 2003
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
Texas v Johnson 1989
13. State govs must provide counsel in cases involving the death penalty to those who can't afford it
Tinker v Des Moines 1969
Plessy v Ferguson 1896
Powell v Alabama 1932
Katz v US 1967
14. Established judicial review
Marbury v Madison 1803
Abington School District v Schempp 1963
Bush v Gore 2000
US v Eichman 1990
15. Banned presidential use of a line=item veto as a violation of legislative powers.
Abington School District v Schempp 1963
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
United States v Lopez 1995
Clinton v New York 1998
16. Cities could legitimately require parade permits in the interest of pubic order (Jehovah's Witnesses march w/out permit)
Engel v Vitale 1962
Webster v Reproductive Health Services 1987
Cox v New Hampshire 1941
Dennis v US 1951
17. Demonstrations near schools that disrupted classes could be legally banned
Grayned v City of rockford 1972
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
Bethel School district v Fraser 1986
Miranda v Arizona 1966
18. 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
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
Hustler Magazine v Falwell 1988
Bush v Gore 2000
US v Eichman 1990
19. Forbids execution of defendants who are mentally retarded
Hustler Magazine v Falwell 1988
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
Gregg v Georgia 1976
Bush v Gore 2000
20. Invalidated 1989 Flag Protection Act
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
South Dakota v Dole 1987
US v Eichman 1990
Virginia v Black 2002
21. States can regulate abortion but not with regulations that impose an 'undue burden' on women
Brandenburg v Ohio 1969
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
Baker v Carr 1962
22. 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
Miller v California 1973
Weeks v US 1914
Smith v Allwright 1944
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
23. Separate but equal for races
Roe v Wade 1973
Barron v Baltimore 1819
Plessy v Ferguson 1896
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
24. Overturned Olmstead - warrants were required to listen in on phone conversation
Abington School District v Schempp 1963
Lawrence v Texas 2003
Katz v US 1967
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
25. Race cannot be sole or predominant factor in redrawing legislative district boundaries (1982 VRA wants them to do that - though)
Kelo v New London 2005
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
Buckley v Baleo 1976
Lloyd corporation v Tanner 1972
26. 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
Lawrence v Texas 2003
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
Barron v Baltimore 1819
27. NC makes mandatory punishment for certain crimes - deemed unconstitutional
Marbury v Madison 1803
Woodson v North Carolina 1976
Roe v Wade 1973
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
28. Confessions given immediately before rights are given means the confession is still admissible
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
Hustler Magazine v Falwell 1988
Oregon v Elstad 1985
Engel v Vitale 1962
29. Fed can limit speech that doesn't lead to action (upholding Smith Act - which made it a crime to support any communist organization)
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
Furman v Georgia 1972
Dennis v US 1951
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
30. States not allowed to prevent or punish inflammatory speech unless it will lead to imminent lawless action
Barron v Baltimore 1819
Brandenburg v Ohio 1969
US v Eichman 1990
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
31. Not libel when they thought it was true at the time of printing
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
Abington School District v Schempp 1963
US v Eichman 1990
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
32. Florida recount in 2000 election was a violation of fourteenth amendment's equal protection clause
New York Times v US 1971
Roe v Wade 1973
Bush v Gore 2000
Baker v Carr 1962
33. Any defendant who asked for a lawyer had to have one granted to him - or any confession after that point is inadmissible
Lloyd corporation v Tanner 1972
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
Webster v Reproductive Health Services 1987
New York Times v US 1971
34. Citizens of Japanese descent could be interned and deprived of basic constitutional rights due to executive order
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
Miller v California 1973
Korematsu v US 1944
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
35. Gave states more power to regulate abortion
Olmstead v US 1928
Hustler Magazine v Falwell 1988
Engel v Vitale 1962
Webster v Reproductive Health Services 1987
36. Segregate with al 'due and deliberate speed'
Brown v Board 2nd 1955
Gregg v Georgia 1976
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
Katz v US 1967
37. States cannot set term limits on members of congress
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
Bethel School district v Fraser 1986
Miranda v Arizona 1966
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
38. Established exclusionary rule
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
Gideon v Wainwright 1963
Weeks v US 1914
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
39. All defendants must be informed of legal rights before they are arrested
Miranda v Arizona 1966
Plessy v Ferguson 1896
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
40. Forbids state-mandated bible reading
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
Abington School District v Schempp 1963
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
Woodson v North Carolina 1976
41. 'Bad Tendency Doctrine -' speech restricted if it has tendency to lead to illegal actions; selectively incorporated freedom of speech to states
US v Nixon 1974
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
Gitlow v NY 1925
Katz v US 1967
42. Cross burning = 'fighting words' = unconstitutional
Virginia v Black 2002
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
Katz v US 1967
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
43. Parents may remove children from public school for religious reasons
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
Olmstead v US 1928
Lawrence v Texas 2003
Betts v Brady 1942
44. Right to privacy
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
Kelo v New London 2005
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
Brandenburg v Ohio 1969
45. Strikes by labor unions are constitutional
Gregg v Georgia 1976
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
Virginia v Black 2002
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
46. Made the CRA 1964 apply to virtually all businesses
Cox v New Hampshire 1941
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
Engel v Vitale 1962
47. Federal courts = final authority on creation of house districts
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
Baker v Carr 1962
Abington School District v Schempp 1963
48. States did not have power to tax the national bank - reinforces supremacy clause
Abington School District v Schempp 1963
Webster v Reproductive Health Services 1987
Gregg v Georgia 1976
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
49. Protesters have substantially fewer assembly rights in malls and other private establishments
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
Lloyd corporation v Tanner 1972
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
50. No such thing as executive privilege in criminal cases - but definitely at other times
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
Cox v New Hampshire 1941
US v Nixon 1974
Near v Minnesota 1931
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