Accounting
Anthropology
Archaeology
Art History
Banking
Biology & Life Science
Business
Business Communication
Business Development
Business Ethics
Business Law
Chemistry
Communication
Computer Science
Counseling
Criminal Law
Curriculum & Instruction
Design
Earth Science
Economic
Education
Engineering
Finance
History & Theory
Humanities
Human Resource
International Business
Investments & Securities
Journalism
Law
Management
Marketing
Medicine
Medicine & Health Science
Nursing
Philosophy
Physic
Psychology
Real Estate
Science
Social Science
Sociology
Special Education
Speech
Visual Arts
Question
In a public park in Sweet Home, Oregon, a group of college students staged a peaceful demonstration against the Iraq War. The protest included the singing of peaceful songs, the display of banners condemning the acts of the U.S. government, and finally the use of several "barrels of oil" that were really large containers filled with colored water. A city ordinance stated that large groups must have a permit to gather in the park in question, and that all gatherings must cease by 11:30 p.m. The students chanted and marched all day on January 20, 2004, and continued until 11:30 that night, when local police told them they had to vacate the area. Then, around midnight, the leader of the group, Lee Segal, stood on a podium and shouted "U.S., we condemn you for a war that is only meant to save your precious oilwe spit on your efforts!" At that instant he pushed over five "barrels of oil" and shouted, "we do not need oil if it is going to kill our brothers and sisters!" The police arrested Segal and several others for their actions. They were charged with violating the terms of their permit because they had remained after 11:30, even though they were warned to leave. They were also charged with destruction of public property because the dye used to color the water in the symbolic barrels destroyed several trees, the grass, a park bench, and two picnic tables. Segal claimed his First Amendment rights were violated, and the ACLU took his case all the way to the Supreme Court.If you were a justice on the Court, how would you rule in this case?
Answer
*A. Varies
Related questions
Q:
McGrain v. Daugherty stemmed from which scandal?A. Teapot DomeB. WhitewaterC. WatergateD. Iran-Contra
Q:
Which of the following is an inherent power held by Congress?A. The power to create a national bank.B. The power to conduct foreign policy.C. The power to coin money.D. The power to enact tariffs.E. The power to raise armies.F. The power of judicial review.
Q:
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.
Q:
Explain how the Court's decision in Hamdan differs from its analysis of its jurisdiction in McCardle.
Q:
Who has the power to change the Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction?
Q:
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. mootnessC. ripenessD. standing to sueE. collusive suits
Q:
In Baker v. Carr (1962; Tennessee reapportionment case) the Supreme Court _______.A. held that reapportionment issues are political questions that cannot be decided by the Supreme CourtB. held that reapportionment disputes may involve constitutional rights questions that the federal courts have jurisdiction to hearC. held that legislative districts must be constructed so that they are equal in terms of populationD. held that the residents of large districts lacked the proper standing to sue in order to challenge the state legislative districting law
Q:
Does public opinion affect the Supreme Court even though the justices are not elected? If so, is the effect a direct one or is it indirect?Explain.
Q:
Discuss the three political factors that scholars believe may affect the justices' decision to place acase on the Court's docket. Give examples of each.
Q:
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.
Q:
What does Stare Decisis mean?A. The Court should ignore past decisions.B. The Court should honor past decisions.C. The Court should let the decision stand.D. B and C.
Q:
Gideon v. Wainwright overruled the Supreme Court's decision in what previous case?A. Powell v. AlabamaB. Argersinger v. HamlinC. Johnson v. ZerbstD. Betts v. Brady
Q:
Explain the two limitations the Court has set on searches incident to a valid arrest.
Q:
What guarantees are afforded to the criminally accused in the two clauses of the Fourth Amendment?
Q:
Which of the following statements best describes the incorporation of the exclusionary rule into the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?A. The exclusionary rule has not been incorporated.B. The exclusionary rule was incorporated in the Weeks v. United States ruling.C. The exclusionary rule was incorporated in the United States v. Leon ruling.D. The exclusionary rule was incorporated in the Mapp v. Ohio ruling.
Q:
Why might it be do argued that Carhart v. Gonzalez may not be reason for concern that Roe may eventually be overturned?
Q:
What rationale did Harlan provide to support the right to privacy in his Ullman dissent? Why do some scholars consider this dissent so important?
Q:
Contrast substantive due process and the rational basis approach.
Q:
After he retired, what did Justice Powell say about Bowers v. Hardwick?A. He had voted correctly with the Court's majority.B. He had probably made a mistake in voting to uphold the Georgia law.C. He hoped to revisit the issue in retirement.D. He never said a word about the decision as per Court norms.
Q:
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.
Q:
In general, how has the Supreme Court ruled on the issue of parental consent for minors seeking an abortions?A. It has upheld most requirements of parental consent.B. It has deemed most requirements of parental consent unconstitutional.C. It has allowed doctors to determine if parents should be notified.D. It has yet to hear a case on the issue.
Q:
Which statement best describes the Supreme Court's decisions in cases involving state funding of abortions?A. The Court has consistently ruled that states must fund abortions in the first trimester if the mother cannot afford it.B. The Court has consistently ruled that states have no obligations to fund abortions.C. The Court originally ruled states must fund abortions, but has since overruled its past decision.D. The Court has yet to hear a case involving funding restrictions on abortions.
Q:
Congress began to enact federal weapons bans in the 1920s? because of _______.A. Increases in organized crimeB. The 1929 St. Valentine's Day massacreC. Increases in violence during the 1920sD. All of the above
Q:
The Supreme Court has made clear that the standards for determining libel differ between public and private people. Explain the rationale for this difference. Be sure to use support from the cases you read in the chapter. Next, explain how the Court's interpretation of protection from libel has changed over time. Finally, address the issue of why the Court protects public figures and officials differently than it protects private citizens. Provide case examples to support your argument.
Q:
Under what conditions has the Court been willing to allow content in the press to be restricted? Does the form of the media matter? How has the Court dealt with cases involving special rights for the media? Has the Court been willing to recognize that reporters enjoy greater freedoms than others?
Q:
How has the Court applied its obscenity law to depictions of acts of violence or cruelty?
Q:
According to New York Times v. Sullivan, a public official must prove _______ to sustain a libel claim:A. defamationB. falsehoodC. actual malice
Q:
The term Prior Restraint means that _______.A. the government reviews materials after publication.B. the government review materials once they are published or producedC. the government has the ability to decide what is published.D. A and C
Q:
In Tinker v. Des Moines the Court held that _______.A. students shed their constitutional right to free speech at schoolB. students do not shed their constitutional right to free speech at schoolC. teachers shed their constitutional right to free speech at schoolD. teachers do not shed their constitutional right to free speech at schoolE. A and CF. B and D
Q:
Why is it so difficult for the Court to decide offensive and hate speech cases?