Why did the framers bar states from imposing duties on imports or exports?
A. Only the federal government could levy taxes.
B. The Constitution banned all taxes by states.
C. The framers wanted to ensure that goods from the states would move freely.
D. None of the above.
Which All of the following is not an exception that may allow the government to invoke
prior restraint?
A. The protection of national security
B. The protection of the president’s reputation
C. The prohibition of obscene materials
D. The prohibition of expression that may incite violence
What led Pritchett to believe that the law was not the only factor affecting justices’
decisions?
A. Justices were elected in 1940.
B. Many of the justices were former politicians.
C. Justices often dissented and did not agree on the legal reasoning in a case.
D. All of the above.
Describe (with examples) three external constraints faced by Supreme Court justices.
Answer:*A. Varies
Which future Supreme Court justice argued before the Court in Reed v. Reed?
A. Thurgood Marshall
B. Sandra Day O”Connor
C. Ruth Bader Ginsburg
D. Antonin Scalia
In National Federation of Independent Business v. Selbelius the Court _______.
A. Upheld congressional power to justify laws under its commerce power
B. Upheld congressional power to justify laws under its taxing power
C. Neither A nor B
D. Both A and B
According to R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, the government_______.
A. It may never regulate hate speech.
B. It may regulate hate speech in a content-neutral manner.
C. It may regulate hate speech in any way necessary to stop it.
Explain the standard the Court set out for determining prior restraint in Near v.
Minnesota and the exceptions that might make government restraint necessary.
Answer:*A. Varies
In Brown II, the Court said that the primary duty of implementing the decision and
ending school segregation rested with what political body?
A. Local school boards
B. District courts
C. Congress
D. U.S. Supreme Court
Which of the following statements best describes the Court’s decision in its first major
apportionment case, Colegrove v. Green?
A. Large apportionment discrepancies in legislative districts violates the Fourteenth
Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause.
B. Large apportionment discrepancies in legislative districts violates the Constitution’s
republican form of government guarantee.
C. Racially motivated redistricting violates the Fifteenth Amendment.
D. The authority to draw district boundaries is a “political question,” and thus should
not be decided in federal courts.
In Adkins v. Children’s Hospital (1923) the Supreme Court struck down a congressional
statute that regulated wages of women and children in the District of Columbia. What
specific provision, according to the Court, was violated by this statute?
Answer:
*A. Varies
Which of the following statements best describes the Supreme Court’s decision in
Oregon v. Mitchell? (note that the decision occurred before the Twenty-sixth
Amendment was passed.)
A. Congress has the power to set a minimum age for voting in federal elections but not
for state and local elections.
B. Congress has the power to set a minimum age for voting in all elections.
C. Congress does not have the power to set a minimum age for voting in any elections.
D. Congress has the power to set a minimum age for voting in state and local elections,
but not in presidential elections.
According to the attitudinal model, the coalition of Justices Thomas, Scalia, Alito, and
Roberts may best be defined as _______.
A. The conservative coalition.
B. The liberal coalition.
C. Tithe moderate coalition.
D. None of the above.
How has the Court ruled on the right to state-funded counsel for indigent defendants
during the appeals process?
A. The right extends through the first obligatory appeal but not to discretionary appeals.
B. The right extends through discretionary appeals, including appeals to the Supreme
Court.
C. The right extends to all discretionary appeals except to the U.S. Supreme Court.
D. The right does not extend to any appeals.
The term Prior Restraint means that _______.
A. the government reviews materials after publication.
B. the government review materials once they are published or produced
C. the government has the ability to decide what is published.
D. A and C
What part of the Missouri abortion law did the Court find constitutional in Webster v.
Reproductive Health Services?
A. The preamble, due to its claim that life begins at conception.
B. The provision that banned public facilities from being used for abortions.
C. The provision that banned state employees from performing abortions.
D. None of the above.
E. Both B and C.
Which of the following presidents was/were impeached by the U.S. House of
Representatives?
A. Richard Nixon
B. Bill Clinton
C. Andrew Johnson
D. A and B
E. B and C
F. A, B, and C
Describe at least three provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that increased
protection against racial discrimination at the voting booth.
Answer:*A. Varies
Where is the origin of the Supreme Court’s concept of justiciability?
A. Article III of the Constitution
B. The Judiciary Act of 1789
C. Marbury v. Madison
D. Eakin v. Raub
In general, Congress may tax for _______.
A. Revenue
B. To regulate behavior
C. For the general welfare
D. None of the above
E. All of the above
Which amendment, known as the Equal Rights Amendment, states, “Equality of rights
under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on
account of sex?”
A. Thirteenth Amendment
B. Fifteenth Amendment
C. Eighteenth Amendment
D. None of the above.
With respect to Powell v. McCormack (1969), which of the following statements is
false?
A. The House of Representatives unconstitutionally excluded Adam Clayton Powell
from his seat because he was properly elected and met the age, residency, and
citizenship requirements for office.
B. The House of Representatives unconstitutionally expelled Adam Clayton Powell
from his seat because he was properly elected and met the age, residency, and
citizenship requirements for office.
C. The Constitution stipulates the eligibility requirements for membership in the House,
and Congress may not impose additional requirements.
D. The House improperly excluded Adam Clayton Powell but could have expelled him
after seating him.
Which of the following circumstances did the Supreme Court say violated the
confrontation clause of the Sixth Amendment?
A. A judge removed a disruptive and abusive defendant, and the trial proceeded without
the accused present.
B. A child witness testified behind a screen so the child would not have to see the
defendant.
C. A child witness testified on a closed-circuit television so the child would not have to
see the defendant.
D. All of the above.
According to the Court in Memoirs v. Massachusetts, an item is not deemed obscene if
it _______.
A. Has at least a modicum of social value
B. Has no modicum of social value
C. Appeals to the prurient interest
D. Lacks serious literary value
Explain the belief/action dichotomy and how the Court used it to decide Cantwell v.
Connecticut.
Answer:*A. Varies
Discuss how the Court dealt with the Speech or Debate Clause in two cases decided
after Gravel. Explain whether the Court expanded or contracted the freedom this clause
gives to members of Congress in each case.
Answer:*A. Varies
In Caperton the Court argued that judges should recuse themselves from cases under
what circumstances?
A. There is some risk of bias.
B. There is serious risk of actual bias.
C. Judges should never recuse, as they are always unbiased.
D. Judges should always recuse unless they know nothing about the case.
New York Times v. United .States. virtually eradicated _______.
A. The ability of the government to censor expression that is obscene
B. The ability of the government to censor expression that might incite violence
C. The ability of the government to regulate expression to protect national security
Taxes on the privilege to vote in state and local elections were invalidated by _______.
A. The Voting Rights Act of 1965
B. The Fifteenth Amendment
C. The Twenty-fourth Amendment
D. The Court’s decision in Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections
Stone v. Mississippi _______.
A. made it clear that the Court was no longer sympathetic to Contract Clause claims to
stop government regulations
B. made it clear that the Court would continue to be sympathetic to Contract Clause
claims to stop government regulations
In Gravel the Court decided that _______.
A. The Speech and Debate Clause protects members of Congress and aides
B. The Speech and Debate Clause does not protect activities not related to the
legislative process
C. Both A and B
D. Neither A nor B
Why is the Court more tolerant of lack of separation between church and state in
colleges than in elementary and secondary schools?
Answer:
*A. Varies
In Nixon v. Fitzgerald (1982) the Court disallowed a suit by a private individual against
the president of the United States, but in Clinton v. Jones (1997) the justices allowed
such a suit. What was the primary difference between the two cases that led the Court to
reach different results?
Answer:
*A. Varies
What rationale did the Court use to deny the reporter’s privilege in Branzburg v. Hayes?
Answer:
*A. Varies
Has the Supreme Court been more willing to uphold actions taken by Congress or the
president that violate the separation of powers on domestic issues or on issues relating
to foreign relations?
The Supreme Court declared, for itself, the power of judicial review in Marbury v.
Madison. Why did Marshall argue that the Court should have this power? Was he
correct? In later cases during the same era, the Court further expanded its power. How
do these cases specifically expand the power of judicial review? Discuss the position of
the Virginia Supreme Court and the U.S. Supreme Court’s response in Martin v.
Hunter’s Lessee. Should the Court be allowed to overturn the decisions of state courts?
Why or why not? Is it democratic that the Courtmade up of nine unelected officialshas
such broad power? Why or why not?
Answer:
*A. Varies
The right to privacy does not explicitly exist in the Constitution, but a majority of the
justices have concluded that a fundamental privacy right exists. Trace the early
foundations on which some members of the Court were willing to protect individuals
from government intrusion into their personal lives. How did Harlan transform these
ideas in Poe v. Ullman? Next, discuss the different justices’ views on the right to
privacy found in Griswold. Explain Douglas’s discussion of penumbras and why they
are so important to his justification for a right to privacy. How did the other justices
defend a right to privacy? What justification did the dissenters in the case offer against a
right to privacy? What has been the interpretation of privacy issues since Griswold? To
what areas has the Court been willing to extend the privacy right, and what have been
its justifications?
Answer:
*A. Varies
The Supreme Court has gone through a long and cyclical relationship concerning the
federal government’s use of the Commerce Clause. In other words, at some points in
history the federal government has been granted wide discretion in its use of the
commerce power, while at others it has been “reined in” by the Court. Using the major
cases that we have discussed, explain how the federal government’s power to control
commerce has changed from Gibbons v. Ogden through Heart of Atlanta Motel. Be sure
to include a discussion of the different ways the Court has defined “commerce.” Finally,
in light of the most recent Commerce Clause cases we have read, what do you think is
the current state of Commerce Clause powers? Why?
Answer:
*A. Varies
The Supreme Court has recognized for some time that searches of individuals
conducted incident to lawful arrest are permissible without a warrant (Weeks v. United
States, 1914). However, the Court has often interpreted Weeks quite broadly, allowing
the searches of homes, automobiles, and so on. Discuss the Court’s pattern regarding
allowable searches. Specifically, under what conditions are searches of individuals
allowable without a warrant? How far does that right to search extend, and under what
circumstances? How have the Court’s decisions regarding the right to search
automobiles, homes, and property changed over time?
Do you feel that the evolution of the Court’s search and seizure policy has been
consistent? If not, identify instances where the Court has diverged significantly from its
previous decisions and offer explanations for such changes.
Answer:*A. Varies
What are the parts of the three-pronged test created by the Court in Lemon v.
Kurtzman? Provide examples of each.
Answer:*A. Varies
How did the Court distinguish Lochner from Holden? Do you find the analysis logical
and convincing? Why or why not?
Answer:
*A. Varies
The Court has held that evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment cannot
be used to convict someone of a federal crime (Weeks v. United States). In what case did
the Court first discuss this protection regarding evidence obtained through an unlawful
search and seizure in relation to the states? In what case did the Court actually
incorporate this protection to the states via the Fourteenth Amendment?
Why was the Court unwilling to declare that virtual child pornography could be
regulated in the same way as actual child pornography? How did it alter this decision in
U.S. v Williams?
Answer:
A. Varies
Trace the history of substantive due process from its origins, through the Lochner era,
and to the present day. What made the Court alter its view of the degree to which
substantive due process protected the rights of individuals and businesses to be free
from government encroachment?
Compare and contrast the views of dual and cooperative federalism. What provisions of
the constitution support each view?
Answer:
*A. Varies
What procedures does the Twenty-fifth Amendment require when there is a vacancy in
the office of vice president?
Answer:
*A. Varies
What is meant by the term “police power”?
Answer:
*A. Varies
Why might it be do argued that Carhart v. Gonzalez may not be reason for concern that
Roe may eventually be overturned?
Answer:
*A. Varies
Congress has passed a law that prohibits shipment across state lines of lager, licorice,
and lawn furniture produced by left-handed Americans of Lithuanian descent. Congress
feels that employers in these particular industries had historically discriminated against
this subgroup of the population. Members believe that they could pass such legislation
based on a power that could be implied from various enumerated powers (e.g., the
powers to lay and collect taxes, to borrow money, and to regulate commerce among the
several states).
The state of Missouri disagrees, arguing that such legislation may be appropriate to
remedy discrimination against federal employees, but it does not pertain to the states. In
its view, this is not an issue involving interstate commerce but rather solely an attempt
by the government to interfere with intrastate commercea thinly veiled attempt by
Congress to impose its own moral views on the state.
How would Chief Justice Marshall decide this case? Whose argument would he
support? How might his view on this case differ from that of Chief Justice Taney? How
would Taney decide the case? The question presented here is not asking whether the
law is constitutional per se; rather, it is requesting that you evaluate and analyze the
approaches Marshall and Taney would take in their opinions. If you were a justice on
the Court, whose approach would you support? Marshall’s? Taney’s? Neither justice’s?