How is the Second Amendment unusual in comparison to the other amendments in the
Bill of Rights?
A. It is much shorter than the other amendments.
B. It has a preamble unlike the other amendments.
C. It is much longer than the other amendments.
Which of the following amendments was not cited as a location of the right to privacy
in the Griswold opinions?
A. First Amendment
B. Fourth Amendment
C. Eighth Amendment
D. Ninth Amendment
Who attends the Court’s conference discussions?
A. Clerks and Justices
B. Only justices
C. Clerks, Justices, and Secretaries
D. Only Clerks
The Supreme Court’s refusal to rule on the merits of Judge Walter Nixon’s challenge to
his impeachment trial by the U.S. Senate was based on Court doctrines regarding
_______.
A. political questions.
B. mootness
C. ripeness
D. standing to sue
E. collusive suits
In A. L. A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States (1935) the justices held that
_______.
A. although federal regulation of the Schechters’ poultry business was constitutionally
permissible, the federal poultry codes were the product of an unconstitutional
delegation of power to the executive branch
B. although the federal poultry codes were constitutionally valid, their application to the
Schechters’ poultry business was constitutionally invalid because the Schechters were
operating in intrastate commerce
C. the federal regulation of food products for safety and cleanliness was constitutionally
permissible, but the poultry codes as drafted were unconstitutionally vague
D. the federal poultry codes were the result of an improper delegation of legislative
power to the executive branch, and the regulation of the Schechters’ poultry business
was an unconstitutional infringement on the state’s right to regulate intrastate commerce
After 1937 most Supreme Court observers believed that the doctrine of economic
substantive due process was dead, and for many years this conclusion was accurate. In
more recent years, however, economic substantive due process has experienced
renewed importance, as exemplified by the Court’s application of the doctrine to
_______.
A. Contract Clause cases
B. Racial discrimination cases
C. Excessive jury awards
D. Labor law
Which of the following statements about the Voting Rights Act of 1965 is not true?
A. A two-thirds majority in Congress overrode Lyndon Johnson’s veto to pass the Act.
B. The Act prohibited literacy tests.
C. The Act applied more stringent standards to states that had a recent history of voter
discrimination.
D. A state could be removed from coverage by convincing the District Court for the
District of Columbia that no discrimination had been practiced for five years.
How did the Sixteenth Amendment change the power of Congress to tax?
Answer:
*A. Varies
Beginning in 1997 the Court began to face questions about regulating media on the
Internet. How, if at all, do these cases differ from the print media cases decided in Roth,
Miller, and Ferber? Should these cases be decided differently, or is the medium not
important and the same standards apply? Why or why not?
Answer:
A. Varies
The state power to tax is inextricably intertwined with the federal government’s power
to control interstate commerce. Using examples from cases you read in this chapter,
explain how the U.S. Supreme Court has reconciled Congress’s commerce power with
states’ power to tax goods and services within their borders. What is the current state of
this relationship?
Answer:
A. Varies
A bitter rivalry exists between residents of Minnesota and Wisconsin over their favorite
National Football League teamsthe Vikings and the Packers. Because Minneapolis is so
close to the Wisconsin border, many Packers fans try to flood the Metrodome (a
publicly owned sports stadium rented out to the Vikings) each season for the game
between the rival teams. To prevent the stadium from being filled with a majority of
Packers fans for this game, the Vikings instituted a new ticket policy. All fans who wish
to purchase tickets for the Packers/Vikings game must also purchase tickets for at least
two Vikings preseason games. The tickets are sold as a “package deal,” according to the
Vikings, and the sole purpose of the policy is to guarantee that the stadium is filled for
preseason games that are often not high-demand games. Many Packers fans see the
policy as, at best, an impediment to seeing their favorite team play, and, at worst, a
punishment.
Respondent Brett Driver argues that the additional purchase requirement is, in essence,
a tax allowed by the state, given that the stadium is state owned. The tax, as he sees it,
is not meant to raise revenue but rather to regulate activity. Further, he argues that the
tax violates the Interstate Commerce Clause because the NFL is an interstate industry
and therefore only Congress can regulate it by setting up such taxes. Driver has asked
the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the “ticket tax” and again allow fans to purchase
tickets for all games without having to purchase tickets for games they do not want to
see.
Suppose you were a justice in this case. Would you rule in favor of Driver (in part or in
full) or the Vikings (in part or in full)? Why?Be sure to (1) justify your response with
reference to relevant Supreme Court precedent and (2) consider, incorporate, or, at least,
acknowledge arguments that may not support your response.
Answer:
*A. Varies
What was the chief concern of Justice White in his Miranda dissent?
Answer:
*A. Varies
What key factor of the Water Resources Development Act’s Harbor Maintenance Tax
made it a tax on exports rather than a user fee according to the decision in United States
v. United States Shoe Corp. (1998)?
Answer:
*A. Varies
Some people argue that the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause simply
requires states to prohibit discrimination. Others argue that states need to take active,
positive, and remedial steps to compensate for the effects of past discrimination. How
have different government actors attempted to actively make up for past discrimination?
How has the Court responded to these efforts over the years? How have different points
of view on the Court been justified (i.e., how have the justices interpreted the
Constitution differently)?
Answer:
*A. Varies
The right to be represented at a criminal trial by a competent attorney is widely viewed
as fundamental in a modern democracy. However, the Supreme Court has recognized
this right only relatively recently, making it binding on the states. How has the right to
counsel evolved over time? Discuss the Supreme Court cases that have extended the
right to counsel to indigents. At what stages are the criminally accused entitled to
counsel? Do you agree with the Court’s reasoning regarding the stages at which counsel
should be provided? In your opinion, is the right to counsel essential to a fair trial?
Should the right to counsel be extended beyond criminal trials to include civil trials as
well? Does the right to represent oneself outweigh the need for counsel? Should counsel
be provided to individuals over their expressed wishes to represent themselves?
Answer:
*A. Varies
Bayport University (a publicly run university) has a stringent nondiscrimination policy
that includes penalties for discrimination based on race, gender, religion, ethnic origin,
or sexual orientation. In 2005 a group of students from the campus LGBT (lesbian, gay,
bi-sexual, and transgendered) student association asked the university to add
transgendered individuals to the list of groups protected from discrimination. The
students sought such action because, as one member of the LGBT community put it,
there is an “attitude of discrimination and prejudice regarding transgender issues,” at the
school, particularly within the administration. The university responded by arguing that,
“Bayport is a safe and supportive place for people of all walks of life, regardless of their
sexual orientation, race, religion, or gender.” The dean of students was also quoted as
saying that “no discrimination or harassment will be tolerated.” Ultimately, the
university did not add transgendered individuals to its list of protected groups.
The current case stems from a controversy that arose during the time the LGBT
community was focused on changing university policy. Mary Weather, a biological
female who identifies as male and has begun taking hormones as part of his gender
transition, was on a waiting list for on-campus housing. The director of campus housing
informed Weather that should student housing become available for him, it would be
with a female roommate. At one point, Weather requested to live with a male friend, but
the campus has a strict policy against opposite-sex living arrangements. The
administration argued that the problem would simply “go away” because Weather was
not guaranteed on-campus housing due to his high lottery number. However, Weather
also allegeds that throughout his attempts to secure appropriate housing he was
repeatedly treated disrespectfully by a several administrators and staff members,
including the president, who informed him the university “has no interest in helping a
transgendered student find housing.”
Weather sued the university for its discriminatory practice but lost at trial. On appeal,
however, the Ninth Circuit Court reversed the trial court, holding that, people from the
LGBT community deserve the same protections as everyone else who attends a public
university. Bayport appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking it to add transgendered
people to the class of citizens protected by the strict scrutiny test. If you were a justice
on the U.S. Supreme Court and this case came before you, how would you rule?
Answer:
*A. Varies
How does the Court define the right to bear arms in District of Columbia v. Heller?
Answer:
*A. Varies
How did Miller alter the Roth test?
Answer:
*A. Varies
In Reynolds v. Sims, what did the majority of the Court say about Alabama’s plan to
follow the federal model for its bicameral state legislature? What justification did the
Court give for its decision?
Answer:
*A. Varies
Explain the three prongs of the Roth test for discerning if material is obscene. Is this a
strict or lenient test? Why?
Answer:
*A. Varies
Why did the Court rule that the defendant’s sentence in Solem v. Helm violated the cruel
and unusual punishment clause of the Eighth Amendment?
Answer:
*A. Varies
What are majority-minority districts? How did the majority of the Court rule on the
constitutionality of designing such districts in Shaw v. Reno and Miller v. Johnson?
Answer:
*A. Varies
Explain the expansion and contraction of the Court’s Takings Clause jurisprudence from
Causby through Kelo. What are the major changes that took place in the Court’s focus
and reasoning during the second half of the twentieth century?
Answer:
*A. Varies
In the two University of Michigan affirmative action cases, why did the Court rule
against the University of Michigan in Gratz v. Bollinger but for the university in
Grutter v. Bollinger?
Answer:
*A. Varies