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
Law
Q:
According to the Court in Memoirs v. Massachusetts, an item is not deemed obscene if it _______.A. Has at least a modicum of social valueB. Has no modicum of social valueC. Appeals to the prurient interestD. Lacks serious literary value
Q:
______________is a deliberate "end run" around Miranda by purposely withholding warnings until after a confession is obtained and then giving Miranda to re-ask the question (and is unconstitutional).
Q:
The ____________________-Act strengthens the ability of the Justice Department and the FBI to monitor suspected terrorists and their associates.
Q:
In Roth the Court ruled that Community Standards are based on _______.A. The nation as a wholeB. Individual statesC. Individual localitiesD. None of the above; the Court did not define community in Roth
Q:
The ______________-exception allows police to questions suspects without first giving Miranda warnings if information sought sufficiently affects the officers' and the public's safety.
Q:
__________________________is questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in a significant way.
Q:
When it comes to content regulation, _______.A. The Court has shown great tolerance for government regulationsB. The Court has ignored government regulationsC. The Court has shown little tolerance for government regulations
Q:
A purposeful, voluntary giving up of a known right is a _________.
Q:
Which All of the following is not an exception that may allow the government to invoke prior restraint?A. The protection of national securityB. The protection of the president's reputationC. The prohibition of obscene materialsD. The prohibition of expression that may incite violence
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:
False confession cases in which the suspect acquiesces to escape from a stressful situation, to avoid punishment, or gain a promised or implied reward are called _________-confessions.
Q:
The requirement that laws themselves be applied fairly refers to ________due process.
Q:
New York Times v. United .States. virtually eradicated _______.A. The ability of the government to censor expression that is obsceneB. The ability of the government to censor expression that might incite violenceC. The ability of the government to regulate expression to protect national security
Q:
The voluntariness of a confession is determined by the ________________and the characteristics of the accused.
Q:
In Branzburg v. Hayes the Court ruled that _______.A. Reporters have a privilege that protects them from appearing in front of a grand juryB. Reporters do not have a privilege that protects them from appearing in front of a grand juryC. Reporters can never divulge the names of informantsD. Reporters must always divulge the names of informants
Q:
In Morse v. Frederick the Court decided that _______.A. Schools may ban speech that may reasonably seem to promote drug useB. Schools may not ban speech that may reasonably seem to promote drug useC. Schools must allow speech that may reasonably seem to promote drug use but may ask the students to carry out their speech away from the public eyeD. Schools may not suspend students for speech that may reasonably seem to promote drug use but they may ask them to leave school grounds during rallies
Q:
Statements are not admissible in court if obtained without Miranda rights during custodial __________.
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:
__________due process is constitutionally guaranteed rights of fairness in how the law is carried out or applied.
Q:
The Miranda warning must be given during lineups, show-ups, and photographic identifications.
a. True
b. False
Q:
Moving full circle from Schenck to Brandenburg, the Court settled on which test in Brandenburg?A. Clear and Present Danger TestB. Preferred Freedoms DoctrineC. Clear and Probable Danger TestD. Imminent Lawless Action Test
Q:
The Preferred Freedoms Doctrine states that _______.A. laws in conflict with the Bill of Rights are not presumed constitutionalB. the judiciary has a special responsibility to protect freedom of speechC. the judiciary has a special responsibility to protect minority interestsD. All of the aboveE. None of the above
Q:
A waiver of Miranda is valid even if the suspect thought the questioning was going to be about a minor crime and the questioning switched to a more serious crime.
a. True
b. False
Q:
Gitlow is an important case because it _______.A. banned freedom of speechB. incorporated freedom of speechC. restricted freedom of speech in statesD. allowed regulation of freedom of speech by the federal government only
Q:
A "soft" Miranda warning recited less harshly and directly than is imprinted on most Miranda cards is permissible if all four warnings are adequately conveyed to the suspect.
a. True
b. False
Q:
The precedent case for analyzing confessions issues is Miranda v. Arizona.
a. True
b. False
Q:
In Schenck v. United States the Court created the _______.A. Clear and Present Danger TestB. Preferred Freedoms DoctrineC. Clear and Probable Danger TestD. Imminent Lawless Action Test
Q:
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?
Q:
Since their actions can ultimately result in arrest, private security officers must inform suspects of their Miranda rights prior to interrogation.a. Trueb. False
Q:
Lying by the police to obtain a confession is a violation of the Fifth Amendment.
a. True
b. False
Q:
Jeremy Stevens, an ardent leftist, was known for his outrageous stunts in his high school of four hundred students in rural Southwest Minnesota. In his freshman year he came to school dressed in a skirt to protest the policy that, while skirts may be worn, no shorts may be worn to school between November 1 and April 1. When he was sent home for indecent conduct, he returned in a traditional Scottish kilt. While under suspension for violating school rules Stevens was granted the right to wear skirts after he sought the advice of the local American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) chapter. During his junior year he drafted an editorial cartoon for the school newspaper that depicted the principal as a drunkard. While the ACLU again wanted to help, it was bound by the Supreme Court's precedent that schools may edit, and restrict content in, school newspapers. Stevens's senior year has been tame, but he did wear a T-shirt to school that proclaimed, "the president is a terrorist." School officials asked him to remove the shirt or go home and change. When he refused, Stevens was suspended for two days. After consulting with the ACLU again, Stevens has decided to sue the school district for violating his freedom of speech found in the First and Fourth Amendments. The case has gone through the courts and has now reached the U.S. Supreme Court.As a justice on the Court, how would you rule given the line of free speech cases decided by the Court? Should Stevens be allowed to wear his T-shirt? Why or why not?Be sure to cite cases from class to support your answers. There is no right answer, but all your arguments must be logical and supported with case law.
Q:
The First Amendment is clear in its protection of the freedom of expression: "Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." However, only Justices Black and Douglas have ever adhered to a literalist interpretation of the Freedom of Expression Clause. All other justices have been willing to place some restrictions on the freedom of expression. Discuss the evolution of standards the Court has used to adjudicate freedom of expression from Schenck to Brandenburg and explain why the Court has not adhered to a single position, instead changing standards depending on the circumstances of the case. Why has the Court been more willing to restrict freedom of expression at certain times and allowed more liberal standards at other times? Are you satisfied with the standards that the Court has provided? Do you feel that the standards should be more or less precise, allowing for more or less freedom in interpreting the standards? Why?
Q:
The prohibition against double jeopardy prevents a second trial for the same offense for any reason.
a. True
b. False
Q:
The Fifth Amendment requires just compensation when the government takes property.
a. True
b. False
Q:
Explain the rationale the Court has used to determine that citizens have the right not to speak.
Q:
Why is it so difficult for the Court to decide offensive and hate speech cases?
Q:
A suspect who has invoked only his right to silence cannot be re-approached to seek a waiver on a different case.
a. True
b. False
Q:
When a person on the witness stand "pleads the Fifth," they are asserting their right against selfincrimination.
a. True
b. False
Q:
How has the Court determined that symbolic speech can qualify for First Amendment protection?
Q:
Which of the following would not violate the right against double jeopardy?
a. A second prosecution for the same offense after acquittal.
b. More than one punishment for the same offense.
c. Independent trials for an offense in both state and federal courts.
d. Lesser-included offenses tried after initial trial.
Q:
Explain the concept of prior restraint and provide at least two examples of government use of prior restraint.
Q:
The Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination comes into play:
a. whenever a law enforcement officer questions a suspect, whether in custody or not.
b. only during custodial interrogation.
c. only at trial.
d. whenever incriminating information is being communicated.
Q:
Give three reasons the court turned back to a more conservative approach to the First Amendment in the early 1950s.
Q:
Explain why, in light of Tinker, the Court was willing to allow the school to suspend students for holding the "BONG HiTS 4 JESUS" banner in Morse v. Fredrick?
Q:
In re Gault assured juveniles:
a. the right to a jury trial.
b. due process in the legal system.
c. the right to be tried as an adult in certain cases.
d. the right against self-incrimination.
Q:
In prisoners' rights cases the Fifth Amendment arises:
a. infrequently.
b. quite often, involving nearly half of all lawsuits filed by prisoners.
c. very often, involving more than 80 percent of all lawsuits filed by prisoners.
d. neverprisoners are not protected by the Fifth Amendment.
Q:
The only unincorporated right guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment is the right to:
a. be a witness against oneself.
b. a grand jury indictment.
c. due process of law.
d. just compensation when government takes private property.
Q:
What rationale led the Court to hold that the city of St. Paul in R.A.V. violated the First Amendment while it held Mitchell's First Amendment rights were not violated by a Wisconsin law a year later in Wisconsin v. Mitchell?
Q:
Explain the standard the Court uses to determine whether an utterance may be considered fighting words.
Q:
Which of the following is not true about grand juries?
a. Choice of jurors determined by state law.
b. Does not make a determination of guilt.
c. May initiate investigations.
d. Different jury for each case.
Q:
The public safety exception was established in:
a. Jacobson v. United States.
b. Katz v. United States.
c. New York v. Quarles.
d. Illinois v. Perkins.
Q:
Explain three conditions that may trigger valid government regulation of expression.
Q:
Which of the following is not a part of the Miranda warning?
a. You have the right to remain silent.
b. If you cannot afford a lawyer, one will be appointed for you without cost.
c. You may stop answering questions at any time you choose.
d. Anything you say can and will be used against you in court.
Q:
What is the preferred freedoms doctrine and how does it relate to the freedom of speech?
Q:
Explain the difference between the clear and present danger test and the clear and probable danger test.
Q:
Statements, including confessions, will not be admissible in court if obtained while violating a person's right to reasonable expectation of privacy under the:a. Fourth Amendmentb. Fifth Amendmentc. Sixth Amendmentd. Fourteenth Amendment
Q:
The precedent case for analyzing confession issues is:
a. Terry v. Ohio.
b. Miranda v. Arizona.
c. Escobedo v. Illinois.
d. Massiah v. United States.
Q:
How does the Court's decision in Abrams differ from the standard it set in Schenck?
Q:
The conception and planning of an offense by an officer and his procurement of its commission by one who would not have perpetrated it except for the trickery, persuasion, or fraud of the officer is:
a. ensnarement
b. entrapment
c. framing
d. a set up
Q:
Why are restrictions on speech often associated with times of crisis?
Q:
In order for a confession to be admissible it must be:
a. voluntary.
b. true.
c. independently corroborated.
d. in writing.
Q:
Which of the following is an example of a clear and present danger?A. Shouting "Fire!" in a crowded movie theater.B. Shouting "Fire!" out in the middle of a forest.C. Speaking out for one's political beliefs in front of the White House.D. None of the above.
Q:
How does the clear and probable danger test differ from the clear and present danger test?A. The two do not differ in any meaningful way.B. The Clear and present danger test requires danger to be proximate.C. The Clear and probable danger test does not require danger to be proximate.D. Both B and C.
Q:
You are the on-duty desk sergeant. A man walks in and says "I killed someone and want to confess." You grab your digital voice recorder and direct the man to a chair at your desk. He sits down and tells the tale of what turns out to be a first-degree murder. You record every word, including the numerous instances in which you said "Uh huh" and "I see." Satisfied that the subject did, indeed, commit a murder, you place him under arrest. The confession is:a. inadmissible because recording it was a violation of the subject's reasonable expectation of privacy.b. inadmissible because the subject was in a coercive environment (police station), was therefore in custody for purposes of Miranda, and the encouragement to continue was interrogation.c. admissible under the "public safety" exception to Miranda as the subject was a danger to the officer and public.d. admissible as a voluntary statement when the subject was neither in custody nor interrogated for purposes of Miranda.
Q:
It is not unconstitutional to obtain a confession by:
a. deprivation of food, drink, and sleep
b. psychological coercion
c. trickery and deceit
d. threats, but not acts, of violence
Q:
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.
Q:
In Snyder v. Phelps Justice Alito broke from his traditional coalition and wrote a dissenting opinion. Why did he do so?A. He argued that the government should be able to regulate all speech.B. He argued that the government has no interest in regulating speech.C. He argued that the government has an interest in regulating speech that protects innocent people from hateful speech.D. None of the above.
Q:
The due process voluntariness test is "whether the totality of the circumstances that preceded the confession deprived the defendant of his...":
a. reasonable expectation of privacy
b. power of resistance
c. self-incrimination rights
d. determination to remain silent.
Q:
The first confession case decided by the Supreme Court was:
a. Miranda v. Arizona.
b. In re Gault.
c. New York v. Quarles.
d. Brown v. Mississippi.
Q:
Police actions that would "shock the conscience" were found to violate due process in:
a. Miranda v. Arizona.
b. Rochin v. California.
c. In re Gault.
d. Katz v. United States.
Q:
The "fighting words" doctrine was enunciated in _______.A. Chaplinksy v. New HampshireB. Rumsfeld v. FAIRC. Boy Scots of America v. DaleD. Texas v. Johnson
Q:
In terms of Freedom of Association, the Rehnquist Court generally _______.A. Made it clear that government antidiscrimination interests may outweigh the expression rights of a groupB. Made it clear that the expression rights of a group outweigh government antidiscrimination interestsC. made it clear that the government may always regulate freedom of associationD. made it clear that the government may never regulate freedom of association
Q:
In which scenario would Miranda warnings be required?
a. Suspect in custody for an unrelated offense.
b. When suspect appears to testify before grand jury.
c. undercover officer poses as inmate and asks incriminating questions.
d. during line-ups, show-ups, and photographic identifications.
Q:
Which of the following at is an example of a content-neutral regulation? _______A. Strikers may not picket against a specific company.B. Strikers may picket only when the government approves of their signs.C. Strikers may not picket in residential areas between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.D. There is no such thing as a content-neutral regulation.
Q:
At issue in Dickerson v. United States was Section 3501 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 which stated that the admissibility of statements should turn only on whether they were voluntarily made, and not only on whether:a. coercive tactics were used.b. Miranda warnings had been given.c. custodial interrogation had occurred.d. the statement was made without an attorney present.
Q:
Miranda warnings must be given to a suspect interrogated in police custody, defined as when the suspect is:
a. under arrest.
b. facing criminal charges.
c. not free to leave.
d. reasonably free to leave the situation.
Q:
Content-based speech regulations _______.A. Apply to all speech and does not discriminateB. Apply to some speech based on subject matter or the message conveyedC. Apply only in discrimination casesD. Apply only in political protest cases
Q:
The Miranda warning must be given:a. immediately upon arresting an individual.b. only to those suspects interrogated in the custody of police. c. to all witnesses who may be called upon to testify in court. d. to anyone being interrogated by the police.
Q:
At 1:15 p.m. on Friday, August 15, 2013, a small tornado touched down just outside Springfield, Minnesota. The tornado caused substantial property damage, injured scores of people, and resulted in ten fatalities. The following Sunday, Adrian Peterson, a local high school teacher, tweeted: "Every day at 1:15 p.m., until the town is fully recovered, everyone in Springfield should tweet #prayingforthevictims."
In the past, Peterson had used Twitter extensively to communicate with students about their assignments and other school announcements. As a result, many of Peterson's students follow him on Twitter. At 1:15 p.m. on Monday Peterson and fifteen of his students tweeted "#prayingforthevictims." That afternoon, the Springfield High School Morning Prayer Group (MPG), an official school student group, launched an Internet campaign to convince other students to participate in the daily Twitter prayers. Each day that week, at the specified time, an increasing number of high school students tweeted "#prayingforthevictims."
In addition, MPG collaborated with the Muslim Student Association, the Mormon Faith Club, the Jewish Student Union, and the Springfield High Humanists to organize an official prayer event to be held one -week after the day of the tornado. The event called for all students to dress in black and to simultaneously stop what they are doing at 1:15 p.m., take a moment of silence, bow their heads, and tweet "#prayingforthevictims." Peterson, who had been re-tweeting that message all week, participated in the silent tweet-prayer but did not assist in coordinating it. The school's official Twitter feed also used the "prayingforthevictims" hashtag on Friday, but the school administration was similarly uninvolved in the event planning.
Kevin Love, an 18 eighteen-year-old senior at Springfield High and an outspoken atheist, did not participate in any of the Twitter prayers. He filed suit against Peterson and the school in federal district court, claiming the defendants' participation in, and support of, the Twitter prayers violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. He asked the court to enjoin the school and its teachers from sending any more religiously motivated tweets. He also asked the court to require that the school institute a policy banning the use of social networking sites during school hours by students for religious purposes. The district court ruled for Love, and the Eighth Circuit Court affirmed that decision. Peterson and the school appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the tweets were nonsectarian and completely voluntary, and that the tweets sent by Peterson and the school did not amount to an endorsement of religion. They further argued that the injunction would prohibit the teachers' and students' free exercise of religion and freedom of speech in violation of the First Amendment.
You are the "swing" justice on the U.S. Supreme Court for this case. Four justices side with the school and Peterson; four others want to rule for Love. Your vote, therefore, will make the majority in either direction, and you are designated to write the majority opinion. Your goal is to craft a plausible, persuasive, and realistic majority opinion in this case. Be sure to cite cases from class to support your position. There is no right answer, but all your arguments must be logical and supported with case law. Be specific about what actions are or are not constitutional.
Q:
Which of the following statements would probably constitute an invocation of Miranda rights?a. "I think I may have said too much."b. "If I don"t like your questions, it's lawyer time." c. "I"ll talk, but I"m not signing that waiver form." d. "I"m done talking to you."