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
Constitutional Law
Q:
Exceptions to the warrant requirement includea. plain feel. b. plain view. c. open fields.d. All of the above.
Q:
Anything that is illegal for people to own or have in their possession is known asa. contraband. b. inadmissible. c. de jure.d. illicit.
Q:
The major change in the Court's Establishment Clause cases ushered in by Walz v. Tax Commission of the City of New York involved _______.A. The Court's focus on the legitimate secular purpose of a lawB. The Court's focus on the primary effect of the law on religionC. The Court's focus on the excessive entanglement of a law with religion
Q:
In religious establishment cases the compelling interest test makes it _______.A. More difficult for government agencies to impose restrictions on religious practicesB. Easier for government agencies to impose restrictions on religious practices
Q:
In Bailey v. United States, the Court ruled
a. every search warrant entitles police officers to arrest the occupants of the premises searched.
b. seizing someone out of the immediate vicinity of the location of the search warrant is unconstitutional.
c. officer safety entitles police to conduct a pat down frisk of any occupant in a premises being searched.
d. every search with a warrant must produce results.
Q:
School-sponsored prayer before football games was ruled unconstitutional in _______.A. Edwards v AguillardB. School District of Abington Township v. SchemppC. Lee v. WeismanD. Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe
Q:
A search with a warrant includes
a. limited authority to detain the occupants of the premises during the search.
b. the requirement to conduct the search within one hour.
c. the authority to arrest anyone who refuses consent.
d. the duty to ensure that the premises are left in the same condition they were found.
Q:
Hudson v. Michigan held that a violation of the warrant knock-and-announce rule,a. shifts the burden of proof to the district attorney at trial. b. invokes the exclusionary rule.c. requires the defense to stipulate to the evidence at trial. d. does not automatically invoke the exclusionary rule.
Q:
In Wisconsin v. Yoder the Court ruled that _______.A. Amish children must attend school after the eighth gradeB. Amish children cannot be compelled to attend school after the eighth gradeC. Amish children must attend school after the twelfth gradeD. Amish children cannot be compelled to attend school after the twelfth grade
Q:
In Reynolds v. United. States the Court outlawed _______.A. The "I am" religionB. PolygamyC. The freedom of religionD. The establishment of religion
Q:
Within the city of Westphalia only one development of one hundred homes is left without city water and sewers. In an effort to better the city, the mayor and council pass an ordinance that all homes must be on city water and sewer systems within three years. According to Westphalia's laws, the city will pay for the construction, pipes, and connections on public property. However, residents who are hooked up to the city water system must pay for connection and installation once the pipes reach their property. The residents in the final development do not want city water, as they live above an underground aquifer that provides excellent well water. They also do not want to pay the estimated $5,000 to $7,500 that it will cost per home to make the connections. To stop the new law, the residents file suit in federal court claiming that forcing them to dig up their yards and add unwanted pipes and water to their properties constitutes a taking within the meaning of the Fifth Amendment. If you were a justice on the Supreme Court in 2005, how would you decide this case?
Q:
Police officers can compel a suspect who may have drugs in his home to wait outside the home while they get a warrant.
a. True
b. False
Q:
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?
Q:
Searches should be limited in scope, but general searches are constitutional and legal.
a. True
b. False
Q:
The Fourth Amendment analysis of when a search comes under Constitutional scrutiny has employed the trespass and privacy doctrines.
a. True
b. False
Q:
Explain how the Rehnquist Court resurrected the Takings Clause from Nolan through Kelo. How does Stevens' majority used by Scalia, Kennedy, and Rehnquist square with the analysis used by earlier Courts?
Q:
According to Midkiff, what must governments prove in order to take property?
Q:
A reasonable expectation of privacy is an implied right that often falls within the penumbra of other specified rights.
a. True
b. False
Q:
After 1967, Courts held that constitutional protections were implicated only when the government physically intruded into persons, houses, papers or effects.
a. True
b. False
Q:
After Penn Central, 1987 was a turning point for the Court's view of the takings clause. Provide two examples of how this change manifested itself.
Q:
Is Kelo consistent with Berman and Midkiff? If so, why? If not, why not? Who has the more convincing argument on this issue, Stevens or O"Connor? Why?
Q:
Discuss what might constitute exigent circumstances. Give specific examples.
Q:
What constitutes a taking, according to United .States. v. Causby?
Q:
Explain the justifications for the automobile exception to the requirement for a warrant.
Q:
Discuss the relationship between electronic surveillance and one's reasonable expectation of privacy.
Q:
How did the standard for public use change between Lucas and Kelo?
Q:
List three fundamental constitutional rules for searches and discuss their importance.
Q:
What does the Court mean by "public use"?
Q:
Discuss at least five exceptions to the search warrant requirement.
Q:
After a person has ______________property, he or she has no reasonable expectation of privacy relative to that property.
Q:
What term refers to the government's power to take private property for a public purpose?
Q:
In what way did the Rehnquist Court indicate it would not fully expand the right to sue for an improper taking?A. It allowed cities to stop renovations of historic landmarks.B. It allowed cities to place moratoriums on building to determine environmental impacts.C. It allowed cities to run cable through all public housing.D. It allowed cities to change flight patterns without compensation.
Q:
According to Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. Chicago (1897), _______.A. Compensation for a taking is essential to the due process of lawB. Compensation for a taking is not essential to the due process of lawC. States may determine when a just compensation is essentialD. The federal government may determine when just compensation is essential
Q:
The property around a home or dwelling directly associated with use of that property is called the___________.
Q:
Driving while intoxicated and hot pursuit situations are examples of _________________.
Q:
The ______________doctrine allows officers who feel something that they immediately identify as contraband, it can be lawfully seized based on probable cause.
Q:
Which of the following statements about the applicability of the Takings Clause is true?A. The requirements of the Takings Clause originally applied only to the federal government, but in Barron v. Baltimore (1833) the Supreme Court ruled that the clause also applies to the states.B. Today the Takings Clause applies only to the actions of state and local governments and not to the actions of the federal government.C. The requirements of the Takings Clause originally applied only to state and local governments, but in Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. Chicago (1897) the Supreme Court ruled that the clause also applies to the federal government.D. Today the Takings Clause applies only to the actions of the federal government and not to the actions of state and local governments.E. None of the above.
Q:
According to Berman v. Parker (1954; case involving urban renewal programs in Washington, D.C.) and Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff (1984; Hawaii land reform case), a key factor in determining whether the public use requirement has been violated is whether the government program provides for the ownership of property taken from one private individual eventually to be transferred to another private individual.A. TrueB. FalseC. True with respect to Berman v. Parker, but false with respect to Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff.D. True with respect to Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff, but false with respect to Berman v. Parker.
Q:
Vehicles may often be searched without a warrant because of their __________.
Q:
When officers arrest someone in a home, they are allowed to make a ____________for their safety.
Q:
In Nollan v. California Coastal Commission (1987; case involving a family's request for a permit to replace the existing home on their beachfront property with a new home) the Court concluded that the fact that the new home would obstruct the view of the ocean from the roadway was not a sufficient reason for the state to condition the building permit on _______.A. the Nollans limiting the height of their new homeB. the Nollans limiting the width of their new homeC. the Nollans building a public viewing area between the roadway and their homeD. the Nollans allowing the creation of a public pathway in front of their home
Q:
In Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council (1992; case involving a state's denial of a permit to construct houses on island lots) the Court held that _______.A. the state's denial of a building permit was not a taking because it was a reasonable regulation for the preservation of the coastal environmentB. the state's denial of a building permit with the intent of eventually placing a state park on the land was a taking that required compensationC. the state's denial of a building permit with the intent of eventually placing a state park on the land would not constitute a taking until the time the state actually began construction of the parkD. the state's denial of a building permit was a taking because it deprived Lucas of the beneficial economic uses of his landE. the state's denial of a building permit was a reasonable application of existing zoning standards
Q:
The area within a person's reach or immediate control is called the person's ___________.
Q:
The case of Terri Schiavo, a woman in a persistent vegetative state, riveted the nation during the first half of 2005. The case centered on the decision of Michael Schiavo, Terri's husband, to remove her feeding tube and her parents' fight to keep her alive. One side of the argument suggests that Terri possessed a fundamental right to die, while the other suggests she had a fundamental right to be given food and water. Both arguments find support in the concept of substantive due process. The former points to the concept that there is a fundamental right to privacy under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, while the latter argues that the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee that citizens will not be denied life without due process of law. Assume that a case similar to the Schiavo case reaches the U.S. Supreme Court and that you are a justice. How will you rule if both parties argue that their side is supported by the concept of substantive due process? Does one side hold more legal weight than the other? Why or why not? If you find that substantive due process is not implicated in this case, how will you rule? Why?
Q:
__________includes anything that is illegal for people to own or have in their possession.
Q:
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?
Q:
Courts typically justify the consent exception by two separate tests: the __________test and the ______test.
Q:
General searches are ____________.
Q:
Using examples from the cases you have read, as well as from the Constitution, explain the differences between procedural due process and substantive due process. Which type of due process do you think the framers meant to include in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments? Why?
Q:
A person's refusal to give consent to search can be used to establish probable cause.
a. True
b. False
Q:
Seizures of items from a suspect's body, such as hair samples, are typically allowed without a warrant incident to arrest if painless reasonable procedures are used.
a. True
b. False
Q:
How did the Court justify moving away from justifications based on substantive due process in West Coast Hotel?
Q:
How did the Court distinguish Lochner from Holden? Do you find the analysis logical and convincing? Why or why not?
Q:
Since they are not incarcerated, probationers and parolees enjoy the same Fourth Amendment rights as law- abiding citizens.
a. True
b. False
Q:
Explain why Allgeyer v. Louisiana (1897) may have been the turning point for the use of substantive due process to protect people's liberty against government encroachment.
Q:
Why were the Slaughterhouse Cases noteworthy when the Court decided them?
Q:
"Open fields" is a federal concept only; some states hold that "No Trespassing" signs establish a right of privacy requiring a warrant.
a. True
b. False
Q:
What are three reasons it is important to understand the doctrine of substantive due process?
Q:
If a warrant states that one specific item is sought, the search may still continue after it is found.
a. True
b. False
Q:
A person's reasonable expectation of privacy determines when Fourth Amendment protections apply.
a. True
b. False
Q:
In Munn v. Illinois (1877) the Supreme Court upheld state regulation of the grain elevator industry against a challenge that the law violated the due process of law guarantees. In its ruling the Court said that due process does not bar the government from regulating certain kinds of businesses. What name or descriptive title did the Court give to the category of businesses that could be regulated?
Q:
The maxim that it is unreasonable for officers to search for "an elephant in a matchbox" means the size of the item(s) sought determines where officers may reasonably search.
a. True
b. False
Q:
When both occupants are present and one consents to a search and one objects, the consent "overrides" the refusal and officers can legally search.a. Trueb. False
Q:
In Muller v. Oregon (1908) the Supreme Court considered the appeal of a laundry owner who had been charged with violating a state law regulating the maximum number of hours employees could work. He challenged the law on the ground that it violated his substantive due process rights. The Court unanimously upheld the law, which was surprising given the Court's tendency at that time to strike down such legislation. What accounts for the Court's reaching a decision in this case that seems so out of line with prevailing precedent (e.g., Lochner v. New York, 1905)?
Q:
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?
Q:
For a search to have occurred, government agents must make physical entry into someone's property.
a. True
b. False
Q:
To what does the term "Brandeis Brief" refer?
Q:
Explain what is meant by the term "substantive due process."
Q:
Officers are required to inform people that they have the right to refuse consent to search.
a. True
b. False
Q:
Exigent circumstances include all of the following, except:
a. driving while intoxicated.
b. a person fleeing upon seeing an officer approach.
c. rendering emergency aid.
d. danger of destruction of evidence.
Q:
In Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), the concept of substantive due process was has been applied to _______.A. the right to privacyB. the right to religious freedomC. the right to educationD. the right to freedom of speech
Q:
In substantive due process cases, the "Four Horsemen" (Justices McReynolds, Butler, Sutherland, and Van Devanter) _______.A. provided a solid bloc of votes for upholding state regulation of business because such regulation did not involve the federal government intruding on the rights of the statesB. did not form a unified bloc as like they did in the Commerce Clause casesC. provided a solid bloc of votes against state regulation of business in much the same way that they stood unified against federal regulation of business in key Commerce Clause cases
Q:
The Fourth Amendment applies:
a. only to police investigating criminal activity.
b. only to state and federal law enforcement agencies.
c. to the actions of both public officials and private citizens.
d. to all government workers.
Q:
In West Coast Hotel v. Parrish (1937) a hotel company challenged a state law setting mandatory minimum wage levels. The company seemingly stood on firm ground, because in Adkins v. Children's Hospital (1923) the Supreme Court set a precedent that such laws violate constitutional due process guarantees. In West Coast Hotel the Supreme Court _______.A. struck down the law, applying the Adkins precedentB. upheld the law, overruling the Adkins precedentC. upheld the law, ignoring Adkins and instead applying the precedent set in Nebbia v. New York (1934; milk regulation case)D. struck down the law, applying the precedents of both Adkins v. Children's Hospital and Lochner v. New York (1905; state regulation of maximum working hours case)
Q:
The precedent for warrantless searches of vehicles came from:
a. Carroll v. United States.
b. Chambers v. Maroney.
c. Robbins v. California.
d. South Dakota v. Opperman.
Q:
Limited searches conducted in accordance with constitutional guidelines serve society's needs while:
a. protecting the individual.
b. preserving the admissibility of any discovered evidence.
c. preventing improper conduct by overzealous law enforcement agents.
d. serving to protect against a successful appeal of a conviction.
Q:
In Williamson v. Lee Optical Co. (1955) the Supreme Court heard a substantive due process challenge to an Oklahoma law that said that an opticians could grind lenses and fit eyeglasses only when presented with a prescription from an ophthalmologist or an optometrist. The law was challenged as unreasonable, unwise, and wasteful. The Supreme Court _______.A. upheld the law, saying that questions about the wisdom or need for a particular law should be answered by the legislature and not the courts;. T thus, challenges to such laws should be made through the electoral process and not through lawsuitsB. struck down the law, explaining that although the relevance of substantive due process had declined, it still barred states from enacting regulatory laws without sufficient evidence demonstrating the need for such regulationC. struck down the law, saying that the state had failed to show that it had a compelling state interest in passing such legislationD. upheld the law, concluding that the state had satisfied its obligations under the compelling state interest test
Q:
The precedent case for searches incidental to a lawful arrest is:
a. Minnesota v. Dickerson.
b. Terry v. Ohio.
c. New Jersey v. T.L.O.
d. Chimel v. California.
Q:
In the Slaughterhouse Cases (1873; cases challenging Louisiana's creation of a monopoly slaughterhouse company), the Supreme Court _______.A. ruled that the creation of the company violated the Contract Clause with respect to earlier state contracts issued to independent butchersB. ruled that the creation of the company did not violate the Contract Clause in spite of previously made state contracts with independent butchersC. adopted a substantive due process interpretation of the Fourteenth AmendmentD. rejected a substantive due process interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment
Q:
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 casesB. Racial discrimination casesC. Excessive jury awardsD. Labor law