Q&A Hero

Q: The Supreme Court has said that a Fourth Amendment _________is a governmental infringement of a legitimate expectation of privacy. a. search b. seizure c. arrest d. investigative stop

Q: In which of the following situations are school officials justified in searching without a warrant or probable cause if they have reasonable suspicion to believe contraband exists? a. University dorm rooms b. Students and student lockers at public and private schools c. Students and student lockers at public schools d. Adult students

Q: Which of the following have lower courts not yet recognized as analogous to plain view? a. plain feel b. plain smell c. plain hearing d. plain taste

Q: In 2005 the issue of steroid use s issue in Major League Baseball came to a head with the suspension of first baseman Rafael Palmeiro. Congress finally took action and forced baseball to come up with a new policy for drug testing, as well as a stringent policy for suspensions. The first part of the law mandated drug testing for every major and minor league player at the beginning of each season, during the all-star break, and prior to any participation in post-season play. The law also called for a 50 fifty-game suspension for the first positive test, suspension for a full season on the second positive test, and a lifetime ban upon a third violation. While the Baseball Players Association and Major League Baseball agreed to the policy, the requirements were forced on the sport by Congress, which said that it would pass a law mandating these requirements if the two sides did not agree on the basic outline. Several players have sued Major League Baseball, claiming that the contracts they signed under the prior agreementwhich called for punishments for drug use of ten-game suspension, thirty-game suspension, and lifetime bans, respectivelywere impaired by this new contract. They argued that Congress cannot force (by coercion) parties to a private contract to change the terms of that contract. The lower courts disagreed and ruled in favor of Major League Baseball. The case is now before the Supreme Court. If you were a justice on the Supreme Court, how would you rule in this case?

Q: How did the Court's conceptualization of the Contract Clause change when John Marshall left the Court and Roger Taney took it over? Was this it a major change, or was the analysis forwarded by Taney simply a more nuanced view of the role of the Contract Clause?

Q: When a person is handcuffed after being arrested, officers may search: a. only their person. b. the area that has been under the immediate control of the suspect prior to being arrested. c. only where the suspect could reach while handcuffed. d. all areas where the suspect could have hidden evidence.

Q: All searches must be: a. with a warrant. b. with consent. c. limited in scope. d. general in nature.

Q: How did the Taney Court differ from the Marshall Court in its interpretation of the Contract Clause? How did its interpretation stay the same?

Q: When conducting inventory searches of a vehicle, it is important to have: a. probable cause to trigger the automobile exception. b. a standard operating procedure. c. a warrant because the vehicle is no longer mobile. d. a systematic method for conducting the search..

Q: How did Marshall's view of the contract clause parallel his views of federal authority in other areas of the law?

Q: To obtain an electronic surveillance warrant, or wiretap order, probable cause that a person is engaging in particular communications must be established by the court and _____________must have already been tried. a. random interception of communicationsb. normal investigative proceduresc. an attempt to obtain oneparty's consentd. a trap and trace device

Q: Why did the framers draft the contract clause on states rather than on the federal government?

Q: Relationships where third-party consent to search is allowed include all except: a. parent/child. b. employer/employee. c. landlord/tenant. d. host/guest.

Q: In Home Building and Loan Association v. Blaisdell (1934) the Supreme Court upheld the Minnesota Mortgage Moratorium Act against a challenge that the law was a violation of the Contract Clause. What were the basic provisions of the act? What reasons did the Court give for upholding the act?

Q: Which of the following is not one of the fundamental constitutional rules that apply to Fourth Amendment cases? a. There must be governmental action. b. General searches are unlawful. c. The person making the challenge must have a reasonable expectation of privacy. d. There must be law enforcement action.

Q: For the framers the right to contract was _______.A. closely tied to the federal governmentB. closely tied to state governmentsC. closely tied to the right of private propertyD. none of the aboveE. all of the above

Q: Prior to the twentieth Century the Contract Clause _______.A. was mostly ignored by the U.S. Supreme CourtB. was not litigated very oftenC. made up a large portion of the Supreme Court's docketD. was ultimately stricken from the Constitution

Q: Which of the following is not one of the criteria that must be met for plain view? a. The original intrusion is legal only because it is pursuant to a valid warrant. b. The items are plainly observed while in the permissible scope of the original intrusion. c. The original intrusion is legal because the officers are present legally. d. The items are immediately recognizable as evidence or contraband.

Q: Stone v. Mississippi _______.A. made it clear that the Court was no longer sympathetic to Contract Clause claims to stop government regulationsB. made it clear that the Court would continue to be sympathetic to Contract Clause claims to stop government regulations

Q: Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge (1837) was _______.A. the last of the Marshall Court opinions strongly supporting the enforcement of the Contract ClauseB. the first of the Taney Court opinions elevating the importance of the public good in considering Contract Clause cases

Q: When government agents are lawfully executing a warrant they: a. must obtain another warrant if they find additional illegal items. b. can seize any contraband, even if not specified in the warrant. c. can continue searching the premises after what was specified in the warrant is found. d. can take anything they want for any reason.

Q: Which of the following would not constitute a lawful warrantless search? a. dumpster-diving b. looking at curtilage from the air c. using a thermal imaging device to find a "grow" room d. covert involuntary DNA sampling

Q: Daniel Webster was one of the most influential legal minds of the nineteenth century. He had a particularly important role in influencing the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Contract Clause. Which of the following best describes Webster's Contract Clause beliefs and activities?A. Webster supported an interpretation of the Contract Clause that balanced the importance of contracts with the public good, as can be seen in his arguments on behalf of the Warren Bridge Company.B. As an attorney Webster supported vigorous enforcement of the Contract Clause, but after being appointed to the Supreme Court he altered his views and tended to support the interests of the public good over the need to protect contracts.C. As an attorney Webster supported vigorous enforcement of the Contract Clause, and after his appointment to the Supreme Court he continued to vote in favor of the Contract Clause in spite of the fact that a majority of his colleagues had Jacksonian views of the primacy of the public good.D. Webster strongly supported a vigorous enforcement of the Contract Clause, representing such clients as the old trustees of Dartmouth College and the Charles River Bridge Company.

Q: Electronic surveillance: a. is governed by the Fourth Amendment. b. never requires a warrant. c. produces no intrusion on one's reasonable expectations of privacy. d. requires a warrant only when entry on premises is necessary to conduct the surveillance.

Q: Routine searches at our national borders require: a. reasonable suspicion. b. consent. c. probable cause. d. no justification.

Q: In Fletcher v. Peck (1810; Yazoo land case) the Supreme Court _______.A. allowed the state of Georgia to rescind its previously executed land sale contract because the original contract was based on fraud and briberyB. held that challenges to state-issued contracts cannot be heard by the federal courts because of Eleventh Amendment prohibitions against suing states in federal courtC. struck down Georgia's attempt to rescind its previously executed land sale contract in spite of the fact that the original contract was based on fraud and briberyD. allowed the state of Georgia to rescind a previously made contract, and the public reaction to this ruling prompted the ratification of the Contract Clause

Q: The Contract Clause _______.A. applies to the actions of state governmentsB. applies to the actions of the federal governmentC. initially applied to the actions of the federal government, but today applies to both the federal government and the statesD. initially applied to the actions of state governments, but today applies to both the state governments and the federal government

Q: United States v. Warshak affirmed: a. mobility produces exigent circumstances. b. no expectation of privacy exists in peer-to-peer sharing services. c. diminished expectation of privacy in a vehicle. d. there is a reasonable expectation of privacy in e-mails.

Q: 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.

Q: The Supreme Court reduced law enforcement's authority to search the passenger compartment of a vehicle incident to arrest in:a. Arizona v. Gantb. Carroll v. United Statesc. United States v. Simmonsd. New York v. Belton

Q: 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?

Q: Officers can conduct a limited protective search incident to in-house arrest ____________that anyone dangerous is hiding in the home. a. without any suspicion b. with reasonable suspicion c. with probable cause d. with specific, articulable facts

Q: A search can be incident to arrest only if it is substantially ___________with the arrest and is confined to the immediate vicinity of the arrest. a. extemporaneous b. noncontemporary c. contemporaneous d. asynchronous

Q: Compare Madison's and Hamilton's positions on using the power to tax for the general welfare.

Q: Why did the Court protect the federal government from state taxes in McCulloch v. Maryland?

Q: For which of the following does Title III require a warrant? a. Electronic surveillance (wiretap) b. Recording phone conversations with consent of one of the two parties to the conversation. c. Using a pen register to obtain the numbers dialed from a telephone. d. Randomly intercepting cordless and cellular phone conversations.

Q: Searches of vehicles incident to the arrest of an occupant area allowed only if the officer has a reasonable belief that the arrestee can gain access to the vehicle or __________will be found in the vehicle. a. contraband b. weapons c. evidence of the crime of arrest d. evidence of any crime

Q: How did the Sixteenth Amendment change the power of Congress to tax?

Q: Which of the following would be considered a violation of a subject's reasonable expectation of privacy, requiring a warrant?a. Police put a "beeper" on a vehicle to monitor its location.b. Undercover officer converses with suspects and uses information in court.c. Taking photographs of curtilage from an aircraft.d. Placing listening device in public telephone booth to monitor conversations.

Q: Explain why the Southern states supported the requirement that taxes be apportioned on the basis of population. What did the three-fifths compromise have to do with this debate?

Q: What four requirements must be met by a federal spending statute for it to be valid, according to the decision in South Dakota v. Dole (1987)?

Q: Which of the following would not be a legitimate factor contributing to the decision to frisk? a. suspect who flees b. suspicion a suspect possesses dangerous drugs c. being in known high-crime area d. suspect's hand is concealed in pocket

Q: General searches are: a. routinely done by police. b. never constitutional. c. permitted if authorized by a warrant. d. permitted in cases where the suspect is found to be armed.

Q: Searches with a warrant: a. are presumed to be unreasonable. b. must be executed within 36 hours to be valid c. are presumed to be reasonable. d. are unlimited in scope.

Q: 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)?

Q: The Constitution places one specific requirement on the federal government's power to impose a tax on duties and imposts. What is it?

Q: The Supreme Court ruled that unannounced cell searches or shakedowns did not require warrants, did not violate inmates' Fourth Amendment rights, and were justified by the need to maintain order in:a. Morrissey v. Brewerb. Bell v. Wolfishc. Gideon v. Wainwrightd. Griffin v. Wisconsin

Q: You are a sheriff and have been receiving complaints about your deputies. It appears that half of the stops and arrests have been of African-American youths, though this minority is only 10% of the population in your county. Citizens are charging your department with racism and racial profiling. You have every confidence that your deputies are acting with professionalism, but the mayor has asked that you write a justification for this disproportionate impact on minority groups in the area. What would you include in this note to the mayor?

Q: The Constitution places one specific requirement on the federal government's power to impose an excise tax. What is it?

Q: In general, Congress may tax for _______.A. RevenueB. To regulate behaviorC. For the general welfareD. None of the aboveE. All of the above

Q: You are a senior police officer in the department and have been tasked by the Chief of Police to draft a policy on how police officers should deal with high-speed chases. There have been several complaints and newspaper articles about recent car chases that ended in the death or serious injury of the drivers. Additionally, some citizens are concerned that high-speed chases in residential neighborhoods are a danger to children and others. You know that many important arrests have been made as a result of such chases. Write a short policy on high-speed chases, explaining what police officers should do and justifying the policy.

Q: You are preparing to train new police officers on the use of force. Using the Graham factors, explain how a Court will look at the reasonableness of force used by a police officer. Also provide an example to the class of a failure to meet the standard.

Q: In National Federation of Independent Business v. Selbelius the Court _______.A. Upheld congressional power to justify laws under its commerce powerB. Upheld congressional power to justify laws under its taxing powerC. Neither A nor BD. Both A and B

Q: Steward Machine Co. v. Davis upheld the constitutionality of _______.A. Social SecurityB. MedicareC. MedicaidD. All of the above

Q: A citizen was killed with three shots fired by a police officer, who was investigating a break-in at the scene of the shooting. The deceased was actually the homeowner who had called the police in the first place. The police officer is quite distraught. Relate the story from the responding police officer's perspective that would provide sufficient facts to justify the killing.

Q: Springer v. United .States. set the precedent that _______.A. The federal government may tax the statesB. The federal government may tax exportsC. The federal government may tax incomesD. None of the above.

Q: You are a police officer and have pulled over a motorist on suspicion of drunk driving, based on your personal observation of the car weaving and repeatedly crossing the double yellow line in the middle of the road. When you approach the vehicle, the driver gets out of the car and starts to run away. Assume that you are authorized under state law to "shoot to injure" a fleeing suspect. What would you do? Why? What if shooting to injure was the only way to stop the suspect? Would this change your answer?

Q: Hylton v. United .States. defines a direct tax as a tax on _______.A. landB. capitationC. individualsD. A and BE. A and C.

Q: When a vehicle is subject to a traffic stop, a passenger in a vehicle is considered _________for the purposes of the Fourth Amendment.

Q: 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.

Q: The decision in Oregon Waste Systems v. Department of Environmental Quality of the State of Oregon (1994; case involving fees imposed on landfill activities) is a good example of the principle that _______.A. states may not place a tax on interstate commerce.B. states may not impose a tax that discriminates against interstate commerce.C. a state may tax interstate commerce at higher rates than it taxes intrastate commerce if the goal is environmental protection.D. under a state's police powers it may tax the importation of hazardous materials from another state even if that tax is so high that such importation is no longer economically viable.

Q: Because a traffic stop is brief and occurs in public, it is not considered an ________requiring Miranda warnings.

Q: If a police officer stops a person based on reasonable suspicion that the person was recently involved in an active indecent exposure, the stop would be justified, but a ________might not be.

Q: In McCray v. United States (1904) the Court held that the justices should not consider the motivations behind a federal tax law in considering the law's constitutionality, but in Bailey v. Drexel Furniture (1922) the Court held that congressional motivations were a relevant factor in such decisions. Which of these two rulings better represents the current state of the law on this question?A. McCray v. United States.B. Bailey v. Drexel Furniture.

Q: Based on the Court's decision in South Carolina v. Baker (1988), _______.A. it is unconstitutional for the federal government to tax income from state and municipal bondsB. it is unconstitutional for the federal government to tax income from registered state and municipal bondsC. it is unconstitutional for the federal government to tax income from state and municipal bearer bondsD. the Constitution does not prohibit the federal government from taxing income from state and municipal bonds regardless of the form in which they are issued

Q: Means v. McDonald held that a stop may last as long as ________in serious cases.

Q: Though there is no rigorous time limit on how long a person may be detained, factors to be considered include the reasonableness of the time used for the investigation that officers wish to conduct, the reasonableness of the means of investigation used by the officer, and the ________.

Q: The Constitution stipulates that a tax on exports _______.A. must be apportioned on the basis of populationB. may be imposed by the federal government, but not by the statesC. may be imposed by the states, but not by the federal governmentD. may not be imposed by the federal or state governmentsE. must be geographically uniform

Q: Courts in some states have upheld vehicle stops on a suspected drunk driver based ona. anonymous tips. b. broken glass.c. a urinalysis.d. Facebook entries.

Q: In Adams v. Williams, the Court held that the requisite suspicion to make a stop can be established bya. an anonymous phone call. b. a jailhouse confession.c. personal observation by a police officer. d. an informant's tip.

Q: Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust (challenge to the federal income tax act of 1894) came before the Supreme Court on two occasions. Taking both decisions into account, which of the following actions did the Supreme Court not take?A. It ruled that a tax on the income from land was essentially the same as a tax on land itself.B. It ruled that taxing the income from state and municipal bonds was an unconstitutional encroachment on the state's power to borrow money.C. It struck down the entire income tax law.D. It held that a tax on land (or a tax on the income from land) was a direct tax, and to be valid it must be apportioned on the basis of population.E. None of the above. Each of the above statements describes an action the Court did take.

Q: Assume for purposes of this question that the federal government has adopted the Organic Foods Act to regulate the production and distribution of organic goods. While this act is controversial in many aspects, one section in particular has received national attention. According to Section 193, "Congress, in conjunction with the FDA and the Department of Agriculture, will set standards for all organic foods served in the nation's elementary, middle, and secondary schools." The states, however, in conjunction with local school boards, are directed "to certify that any agricultural commodity, regardless of its point of origin, meets two requirements. First, the producer or distributor must submit documentation of the methods used to produce it. Second, samples of the commodity must pass certain tests for the presence of chemicals, synthetic hormones, genetic alterations, and other nonorganic substances." The states and school districts are directed to provide testing services, which are often quite expensive. Minnesota School District No. 720 challenges the law, arguing that it is up to the states and local school districts to regulate the food served in their own states. The district files suit, alleging that the regulations violate the "dormant" Commerce Clause. As a justice on the Supreme Court, how would you rule in this case?

Q: Since a stop is a seizure within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment, it requiresa. police involvement. b. reasonableness.c. adverse possession.d. clear and convincing evidence.

Q: The brief detention of a person based on specific and articulable facts for the purpose of investigating suspicious activity is known asa. a BOLO. b. an arrest.c. an interview. d. a stop.

Q: 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?

Q: 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?

Q: The elements of a seizure includea. intending to seize the object or person. b. a warrant.c. an arrest.d. a prior warning.

Q: Although a stop and an arrest are quite different, they are both regulated by the Fourth Amendment. a. True b. False

Q: Explain what is meant by the term "stream of commerce" and how the Court justified this interpretation of commerce during the nineteenth 19th century.

Q: A warrant is generally required to stop and frisk an individual based on reasonable suspicion. a. True b. False