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. BSA could expel any homosexual member they wanted because of first amendment right of expressive association
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
Betts v Brady 1942
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
2. 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
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
3. School district can suspend students for lewd or indecent speech
South Dakota v Dole 1987
Olmstead v US 1928
Bethel School district v Fraser 1986
New York Times v US 1971
4. Established judicial review
Dennis v US 1951
Marbury v Madison 1803
Cox v New Hampshire 1941
Engel v Vitale 1962
5. Not libel when they thought it was true at the time of printing
Gibbons v Ogden 1824
United States v Lopez 1995
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
Tinker v Des Moines 1969
6. Prohibited states from banning teaching of evolution in public schools
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
Marbury v Madison 1803
7. African Americans denied right to vote in primaries = violate fifteenth amendment
Buckley v Baleo 1976
Smith v Allwright 1944
Texas v Johnson 1989
US v Eichman 1990
8. 'Bad Tendency Doctrine -' speech restricted if it has tendency to lead to illegal actions; selectively incorporated freedom of speech to states
Furman v Georgia 1972
Gitlow v NY 1925
South Dakota v Dole 1987
Mapp v Ohio 1961
9. Race-based affirmative action was permissible so long as it was in the service of creating greater diversity
Oregon v Elstad 1985
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
Brandenburg v Ohio 1969
10. Commerce clause of the constitution does not give congress the power to regulate guns near state operated schools
Kelo v New London 2005
United States v Lopez 1995
Gregg v Georgia 1976
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
11. Halt to all death penalty punishments in nation until a less arbitrary method of sentencing was found
Texas v Johnson 1989
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
Lloyd corporation v Tanner 1972
Furman v Georgia 1972
12. Students don't 'shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse door -' Iowa students suspended for wearing armbands to protest Vietnam war
Olmstead v US 1928
Tinker v Des Moines 1969
Buckley v Baleo 1976
Schenck v US 1919
13. NY could not grant steamship company monopoly - increased federal power over interstate commerce
Woodson v North Carolina 1976
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
Gibbons v Ogden 1824
14. Forbids state-mandated bible reading
Lawrence v Texas 2003
Bush v Gore 2000
New York Times v US 1971
Abington School District v Schempp 1963
15. Demonstrations near schools that disrupted classes could be legally banned
Cox v New Hampshire 1941
Grayned v City of rockford 1972
Marbury v Madison 1803
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
16. Florida recount in 2000 election was a violation of fourteenth amendment's equal protection clause
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
Woodson v North Carolina 1976
Bush v Gore 2000
US v Eichman 1990
17. Separate is not equal
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
Clinton v New York 1998
Weeks v US 1914
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
18. Secular rather than religious purpose? neither promote nor discourage religion? avoid 'excessive entanglement?'
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
Webster v Reproductive Health Services 1987
Buckley v Baleo 1976
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
19. 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
New York Times v US 1971
Barron v Baltimore 1819
Grayned v City of rockford 1972
Korematsu v US 1944
20. Overturned Olmstead - warrants were required to listen in on phone conversation
Buckley v Baleo 1976
Fletcher v Peck 1810
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
Katz v US 1967
21. States cannot set term limits on members of congress
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
Tinker v Des Moines 1969
22. Mandated 21-year-old drinking age (if you don't feds will take away all federal highway funds
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
Buckley v Baleo 1976
South Dakota v Dole 1987
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
23. All defendants must be informed of legal rights before they are arrested
Smith v Allwright 1944
Baker v Carr 1962
Miranda v Arizona 1966
Gitlow v NY 1925
24. Legitimate use of eminent domain - town wanting to buy private land and turn it over to private developers
Cox v New Hampshire 1941
Kelo v New London 2005
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
Miller v California 1973
25. Libel and obscenity not protected by first amendment - so three-part obscenity test established
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
Kelo v New London 2005
Miller v California 1973
Barron v Baltimore 1819
26. FCRA mandated that places of public accommodation are prohibited from discrimination against blacks
Wisconsin v Yoder 1972
Marbury v Madison 1803
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
27. Protesters have substantially fewer assembly rights in malls and other private establishments
Lloyd corporation v Tanner 1972
Fletcher v Peck 1810
Gitlow v NY 1925
Dartmouth college v woodward 1819
28. Cross burning = 'fighting words' = unconstitutional
Lawrence v Texas 2003
Lloyd corporation v Tanner 1972
Virginia v Black 2002
Miller v California 1973
29. Federal wiretaps of phone conversation is constitutional
Gregg v Georgia 1976
Barron v Baltimore 1819
Olmstead v US 1928
United States v Lopez 1995
30. Fighting words - certain offensive types of speech prohibited
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
Epperson v Arkansas 1968
US v Nixon 1974
31. States did not have power to tax the national bank - reinforces supremacy clause
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
Grutter & Gratz v Bollinger 2003
Gibbons v Ogden 1824
Roe v Wade 1973
32. Established national abortion guidelines by extending inferred right of privacy from Griswold
Kelo v New London 2005
Miranda v Arizona 1966
Brown v Board 2nd 1955
Roe v Wade 1973
33. Separate but equal for races
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
Dennis v US 1951
Plessy v Ferguson 1896
Buckley v Baleo 1976
34. Overruled Powell - state govs do not have to provide lawyers to indigent defendants in capital cases
Betts v Brady 1942
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964
Kelo v New London 2005
Fletcher v Peck 1810
35. Federal courts = final authority on creation of house districts
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
Baker v Carr 1962
McCulloch v Maryland 1819
Escobedo v Illinois 1964
36. Clear and present danger (yelling fire) - Holmes
Schenck v US 1919
Dennis v US 1951
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
Near v Minnesota 1931
37. Confessions given immediately before rights are given means the confession is still admissible
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
Baker v Carr 1962
Oregon v Elstad 1985
Engel v Vitale 1962
38. Peaceable assembly for lawful discussion cannot be made a crime - selectively incorporated right to lawful assembly to all state governments
Grayned v City of rockford 1972
DeJonge v Oregon 1937
Lemon v Kurtzman 1971
Betts v Brady 1942
39. Extended exclusionary rule to the states
Powell v Alabama 1932
United States v Lopez 1995
Lawrence v Texas 2003
Mapp v Ohio 1961
40. You can burn the flag
Betts v Brady 1942
Texas v Johnson 1989
Kelo v New London 2005
Brown v Board of Education of Topeka 1954
41. Strikes by labor unions are constitutional
New York Times v US 1971
Chaplinsky v New Hampshire 1942
Gibbons v Ogden 1824
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
42. 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
Boy Scouts of America v Dale 2000
United States v Lopez 1995
New York Times v Sullivan 1964
43. 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
Bush v Gore 2000
Webster v Reproductive Health Services 1987
Virginia v Black 2002
44. No such thing as executive privilege in criminal cases - but definitely at other times
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
Marbury v Madison 1803
Engel v Vitale 1962
US v Nixon 1974
45. State govs must provide counsel in cases involving the death penalty to those who can't afford it
Shaw v Reno 1993 and Miller v Johnson 1995
Powell v Alabama 1932
Grutter & Gratz v Bollinger 2003
US v Eichman 1990
46. States not allowed to prevent or punish inflammatory speech unless it will lead to imminent lawless action
Brandenburg v Ohio 1969
Lloyd corporation v Tanner 1972
Thornhill v Alabama 1940
Miranda v Arizona 1966
47. Executive efforts to prevent publication forbidden (Ellsburg & Vietnam)
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
US Term Limits v Thornton 1995
New York Times v US 1971
Woodson v North Carolina 1976
48. Selectively incorporates freedom of the press - prevents prior restraint -state injunctions to prevent publication unconstitutional
US v Eichman 1990
South Dakota v Dole 1987
Bush v Gore 2000
Near v Minnesota 1931
49. Made the CRA 1964 apply to virtually all businesses
Virginia v Black 2002
Brown v Board 2nd 1955
Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978
Katzenbach v McClung 1964
50. Ordered house districts to be near as equal as possible - enshrined principal of 'one man - one vote.'
Wesberry v Sanders 1963
Furman v Georgia 1972
Mapp v Ohio 1961
Escobedo v Illinois 1964