Unlock document.
This document is partially blurred.
Unlock all pages and 1 million more documents.
Get Access
293. Florida passes a tax that applies only to foreign ships that unload cargo at the ports of Miami and Tampa. This tax
is:
a. unconstitutional; states must charge fees for the use of public facilities
b. constitutional; it is related to benefits received
c. constitutional; it only applies to foreign merchants, so it does not discriminate against interstate commerce
d. constitutional so long as the federal government imposes a similar tax
e. none of the other choices
294. Which of the following types of speech are not protected by the First Amendment?
a. a pamphlet prepared by a gas company in support of the use of natural gas
b. political speech by a person at a public facility such as a train station
c. an advertisement listing the prices charged by a local doctor for her services
d. yelling "Fire" at a crowded basketball game
e. all of the other choices
295. Which of the following types of speech are not protected by the First Amendment?
a. a pamphlet prepared by a gas company in support of the use of natural gas
b. political speech by a person at a public facility such as a train station
c. an advertisement listing the prices charged by a local doctor for her services
d. none of the other choices are protected
e. all of the other choices are protected
296. Company X contributes to a group that opposes increases in state taxes. State Y has a law that prohibits businesses
from donating money when the money may influence how people vote on issues. X challenges the law. A court will
likely find:
a. X is guilty of violating a valid state law
b. the law is invalid because it impedes interstate commerce
c. the law is invalid because it violates the First Amendment rights of the business
d. the law is valid because it seeks only to restrict political speech by business
e. the law is valid because states have the right to regulate political speech in general
297. Ohio Phone, a regulated company, sends a flyer to customers with their monthly bill. One flyer tells customers that
the Ohio Phone Comm. does not let the company charge fair prices and that the quality of phone service will fall.
The Commission orders the company to stop sending mailings that discuss these issues, since the customers are
forced to pay for the mailings as a part of their service. The Supreme Court is likely to say that such mailings:
a. are constitutional under the First Amendment
b. are constitutional under the commerce clause⎯the states may not ban such mailings
c. may be prohibited under the Constitution because the First Amendment does not protect political speech by
regulated companies
d. may be prohibited under the commerce clause because state regulation of utility monopolies is nearly
unlimited
e. could not be addressed by the U.S. Supreme Court; it is a matter for Ohio law
298. Ohio Phone, a regulated company, sends a flyer to customers with their monthly bill. One flyer tells customers that
the Ohio Phone Comm. does not let the company charge fair prices and that the quality of phone service will fall.
The Commission orders the company to stop sending mailings that discuss these issues, since the customers are
forced to pay for the mailings as a part of their service. The Supreme Court is likely to say that such mailings:
a. are constitutional under the Fifth Amendment as private property
b. may be prohibited under the Constitution because the First Amendment does not protect political speech by
regulated companies
c. may be prohibited under the commerce clause because state regulation of utility monopolies is nearly
unlimited
d. could not be addressed by the U.S. Supreme Court; it is a matter for Ohio law
e. none of the other choices
299. Dr. Ayau is a new doctor who has just set up a practice in San Diego. She places ads in the papers to tell people
that she will see patients and she will be in her office on Sundays. The California Medical Assn. (CMA) moves to
strip Dr. Ayau of her license to practice medicine because such ads are unethical. The Supreme Court is likely to
say that the CMA:
a. has the right, under state law, to regulate the practice of medicine and to set ethical standards for all
physicians
b. has the right, under the necessary and proper clause, to regulate advertising medicine
c. has the right, under the commerce clause, to so regulate the advertising of medicine
d. cannot prevent doctors from using truthful advertising to help their business
e. cannot regulate medicine because it conflicts with the right of Congress to do so
300. Dr. Ayau is a new doctor who has just set up a practice in San Diego. She places ads in the papers to tell people
that she will see patients and she will be in her office on Sundays. The California Medical Assn. (CMA) moves to
strip Dr. Ayau of her license to practice medicine because such ads are unethical. The Supreme Court is likely to
say that the CMA:
a. has the right, under state law, to regulate the practice of medicine and to set ethical standards for all
physicians
b. has the right, under the necessary and proper clause, to regulate advertising medicine
c. has the right, under the commerce clause, to so regulate the advertising of medicine
d. cannot regulate medicine because it conflicts with the right of Congress to do so
e. none of the other choices
301. Agents of the Software Agency (SA) check companies to be sure all the software they use is properly licensed, not
copied. SA agents arrive at Bob's Drugs to conduct an inspection. Bob asks the agent to see her search warrant,
otherwise he will not admit her. The SA contends that a warrant is not needed to conduct a routine search to see if
SA regulations are being followed. The Supreme Court is likely to say that warrants by SA officials are:
a. not needed to search property regulated by Congress given its authority under the commerce clause
b. not needed to search business property because the Fourth Amendment (search and seizure) only applies to
persons and their property
c. not needed because the Third Amendment (quartering of federal officials) allows entry into property by
government officials as needed for law enforcement purposes
d. needed to search business property because the Fourth Amendment (search and seizure) applies to
businesses as well as persons
e. needed because the Third Amendment (quartering of federal officials) does not allow entry into property by
government officials for law enforcement purposes without a warrant
302. Agents of the Software Agency (SA) check companies to be sure all the software they use is properly licensed, not
copied. SA agents arrive at Bob's Drugs to conduct an inspection. Bob asks the agent to see her search warrant,
otherwise he will not admit her. The SA contends that a warrant is not needed to conduct a routine search to see if
SA regulations are being followed. The Supreme Court is likely to say that warrants by SA officials are:
a. not needed to search property regulated by Congress given its authority under the commerce clause
b. not needed to search business property because the Fourth Amendment (search and seizure) only applies to
persons and their property
c. not needed because the Third Amendment (quartering of federal officials) allows entry into property by
government officials as needed for law enforcement purposes
d. needed because the Third Amendment (quartering of federal officials) does not allow entry into property by
government officials for law enforcement purposes without a warrant
e. none of the other choices
303. You purchase 150 acres of property in the Oregon mountains that is zoned for construction on pieces of land more
than 40 acres in size. Before you build a home, the Oregon legislature passes the Preservation Act, which prohibits
construction. Your land is nearly worthless now and you sue. Your basis for a suit against Oregon is:
a. illegal interference with contract
b. violation of the 14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause
c. unconstitutional infringement of your Second Amendment rights
d. an unconstitutional uncompensated government takings
e. a invalid infringement of your right to criticize the government
304. You purchase 150 acres of property in the Oregon mountains that is zoned for residential construction. Before you
build a home, the Oregon legislature passes the Preservation Act, which prohibits construction. Your land is nearly
worthless now and you sue. Your basis for a suit against Oregon is:
a. illegal interference with contract
b. violation of the 14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause
c. unconstitutional infringement of your Second Amendment rights
d. a invalid infringement of your right to criticize the government
e. none of the other choices
305. The Clean Air Act imposes civil penalties on executives of companies violate air pollution standards. If the
government sued an executive for violating this law and asked for $100,000 in civil penalties to be imposed, the
executive would have:
a. no right to a jury trial
b. no right to a jury trial only if the trial was held in some state courts
c. a right to a jury trial in any court
d. a right to a jury trial only if the trial was held in some state courts
e. no right to a trial since this is a civil law case
306. The Clean Air Act imposes civil penalties on executives of companies violate air pollution standards. If the
government sued an executive for violating this law and asked for $100,000 in civil penalties to be imposed, the
executive would have:
a. no right to a jury trial only if the trial was held in some state courts
b. a right to a jury trial in any court
c. a right to a jury trial only if the trial was held in some state courts
d. no right to a trial since this is a civil law case
e. none of the other choices
307. Indiana imposes a one percent property tax on grocery stores built before 1970 and a five percent property tax on
grocery stores built after 1970. The different tax rates are probably:
a. unconstitutional; they violate the commerce clause protection of interstate commerce
b. constitutional; they do not violate the commerce clause protection of interstate commerce
c. unconstitutional; they violate the right of Congress to regulate interstate and intrastate commerce
d. unconstitutional; they violate the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
e. none of the other choices
Fact Pattern 4-1
You own Priscilla's Pecans. You employ five people and sell your pecan products in one town in Georgia. Your
products are not sold in any other state.
The federal government imposes regulations on the pecan industry. The Georgia legislature issues its own safety
laws that are stricter than the federal rules. Georgia also places a tax on pecan products made out-of-state because
it fears those products will not be as safe as those produced in Georgia under the strict Georgia regulations.
The regulations raise the cost of doing business. To register your unhappiness with the Georgia regulations you
attach a label to your products that alerts customers to the rules and expresses your view that the rules are
unnecessary and too costly. You donate $10,000 to the campaign of Lucinda Snopes, a friend who is running for the
legislature. She opposes the pecan law.
Buddy Reeves, the county attorney, reads the label criticizing the new safety regulations. He draws up a complaint
against you and against Priscilla's for distributing inflammatory statements in commerce. He instructs the sheriff to
seize your products in order to stop distribution of your statement, which the sheriff does. You contact attorney
Travis Shifflett and ask him to represent you.
308. Refer to Fact Pattern 4-1. Georgia may pass pecan regulations for Georgia producers that are stricter than the
federal regulations so long as:
a. the state regulations do not conflict with the intent of the federal regulations
b. the state regulations are constitutional
c. the state regulations do not impede interstate commerce
d. all three of the specific choices are correct
e. none of the other choices are correct
309. Refer to Fact Pattern 4-1. How do the federal safety regulations affect Priscilla's?
a. because Priscilla's is a strictly local business, these regulations do not affect you
b. the federal regulations affect you only if they have the same content as the Georgia regulations
c. the federal regulations apply to you
d. the federal regulations do not apply to you based on the rationale of Wickard v. Filburn
e. the federal regulations do not apply to you because the Georgia regulations are illegal
310. Refer to Fact Pattern 4-1. The tax Georgia places on out-of-state pecan producers is:
a. a legal reaction to a safety concern
b. an illegitimate expression of state separatism
c. illegal because it violates the Sixth Amendment
d. illegal because it interferes with interstate commerce
e. legal according to Quill Corp. v. North Dakota
311. Refer to Fact Pattern 4-1. The question of whether or not you may attach the label criticizing regulation of pecan
products, most significantly affects which of your rights?
a. Fourth Amendment rights
b. First Amendment rights
c. Fifth Amendment rights
d. rights to equal protection under the law
e. constitutional right to profits
312. Refer to Fact Pattern 4-1. Your attorney will rely on which case to argue that the labels are legal, protected speech
and the regulation is unconstitutional:
a. Wickard v. Filburn
b. New York v. Burger
c. Katzenbach v. McClung
d. Consolidated Edison v. Public Service Comm. of New York
e. Japan Line Ltd. v. County of Los Angeles
313. Refer to Fact Pattern 4-1. Prosecutor Reeves charges that your $10,000 contribution to Lucinda Snopes is illegal
under a Georgia law that prohibits corporations from donating any money to political campaigns. You argue that this
law infringes on your constitutional right to freedom of speech. You are:
a. correct, state laws may not infringe upon constitutionally guaranteed rights such as freedom of speech
b. correct, the state restriction is too far reaching
c. incorrect, because your speech impedes interstate commerce and so cannot be considered "free speech"
d. incorrect, because states may prohibit the use of corporate money for supporting political candidates
e. correct, under the ruling of Southern Pacific v. Arizona
314. Refer to Fact Pattern 4-1. The sheriff's confiscation of your goods may pose which, if any, of the following
problems?
a. the sheriff searched your premises without a warrant, thus violating your 4th Amendment rights
b. even though the sheriff searched your premises without a warrant, there is no constitutional problem because
Fourth Amendment rights apply to persons, not businesses
c. a Sixth Amendment takings problem may be involved
d. no constitutional problems arise from the sheriff's acts
e. all of the other choices are correct
