c2
1. In 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court in Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association:
2. Laws limiting minors’ access to video games depicting violent images are subject to the standard of judicial
review known as:
3. A primary goal of free speech in Meiklejohnian theory is:
4. The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2012 ruling in United States v. Alvarez struck down part of a federal law known as
the:
5. According to the textbook, a great “historical myth” regarding the First Amendment is that:
6. The 2009 appellate court ruling in Plame Wilson v. Central Intelligence Agency best illustrates the point that:
7. In Near v. Minnesota, the Supreme Court ruled that:
8. As described in the textbook, the access theory of freedom of expression can be seen as a remedy to correct
some of the flaws with which one of the following other theories?
9. The concept of a “heckler’s veto” best relates to which one of the following?
10. The incorporation doctrine links the First Amendment with the:
11. The Brandenburg test for incitement is also commonly used in:
12. The case of United States v. Bell involved a prior restraint on:
13. Several decades prior to the community censorship involving the Dixie Chicks in 2003, country music
stations refused to play the songs of another female country music performer. As described in the textbook, who
was the performer and what were the songs in question about?
14. Set forth the four components or elements of the test articulated by the United States Supreme Court in
Brandenburg v. Ohio.
15. Identify the two basic elements or parts of the symbolic speech doctrine.
1) Actor: the person engaging in the conduct must intend to convey a specific or particular message with his or
her conduct; and 2) Audience: there must be a great likelihood, under the surrounding circumstances in which
the conduct takes place, that some people who witness it will reasonably understand the specific or particular
message that was intended by the actor.
16. As listed and described in the textbook, set forth the four key rules that are important to understand when
the government engages in a prior restraint on speech.
1) Prior restraints by the government on speech are presumptively unconstitutional and thus the burden falls on
the government to prove in court that a prior restraint is justified; 2) The government’s burden in justifying a
prior restraint is high, with courts often requiring it to prove there is a compelling interest or an interest of the
highest order justifying the restraint; 3) The scope of any prior restraint (how broadly the restraint is drafted and
how much speech is restrained) must be very narrow, so as not to stop publication of any more speech than
actually is necessary to effectively serve the government’s allegedly compelling interests; and 4) Speech that
17. Explain what is meant by Absolutist Theory.
Absolutist theory holds that the First Amendment provides for an absolute or complete barrier against any
government censorship. The government cannot censor the press or speech for any reason. There are no
exceptions, no caveats, no qualifications to the guarantees of free speech and press. The words “no law” in the
First Amendment mean exactly that – that Congress cannot make any laws restricting expression.
18. With the Correct Year: The First Amendment was adopted in the year ______.
1791
19. The balancing theory that weighs the interests in any situation on a case-by-case basis is known as
________ balancing.
20. In order to justify a regulation on speech under the strict scrutiny standard of judicial review, the
government must prove that it has a __________ interest.
21. The outcome of the seditious libel trial involving John Peter Zenger represents an example of jury
nullification.
22. A judge held in 2012 that a man who stripped naked at an airport security checkpoint to protest
privacy-invasive security measures was engaging in symbolic speech.
23. The First Amendment was an effective tool in blocking prosecutions under the Espionage Act of 1917.
24. In 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court in United States v. Stevens refused to create a new category of unprotected
speech for videos depicting images of animal cruelty.
25. The firing of Don Imus for his “nappy-headed hos” is an example of censorship by the Federal
Communications Commission.
