Q&A Hero

Q: How does judicial review in the United. States. compare to judicial review in other nations? Why is the use of judicial review more controversial in the United States than in other nations whose courts enjoy the same power?

Q: Which of the following is insufficient to support probable cause? a. physical evidence b. admissions c. association with known criminals d. failure to protest arrest

Q: The Court is constrained because it cannot hear a case if it is not justiciable. Explain what it means for a case to be considered justiciable, and cite cases we have read to support your argument. Finally, is justiciability a constraint on the Court? Why or why not?

Q: All of the following are true of the exclusionary rule, except: a. is used to discourage the police from violating a person's constitutional rights. b. is judge-made law. c. excludes illegally obtained evidence from trial. d. it provides for criminal sanctions against the officer.

Q: Despite the Court's seemingly unlimited power of judicial review, there are limits to this power. How does the Court's jurisdiction constrain its power?

Q: When executing a search or arrest warrant, the common law rule is that for an entry into the home to be constitutional, the police must first: a. evacuate the immediate area. b. knock and identify themselves and their purpose. c. read the occupants their Miranda warnings. d. obtain consent to enter.

Q: In Rochin v. California, the Supreme Court held that searches that ________are a violation of due process and any evidence so obtained will, therefore, be inadmissible. a. offend liberty b. violate privacy c. show a heedless disregard for civil rights d. shock the conscience

Q: The Supreme Court declared, for itself, the power of judicial review in Marbury v. Madison. Why did Marshall argue that the Court should have this power? Was he correct? In later cases during the same era, the Court further expanded its power. How do these cases specifically expand the power of judicial review? Discuss the position of the Virginia Supreme Court and the U.S. Supreme Court's response in Martin v. Hunter's Lessee. Should the Court be allowed to overturn the decisions of state courts? Why or why not? Is it democratic that the Courtmade up of nine unelected officialshas such broad power? Why or why not?

Q: While Marbury v. Madison (1803) firmly established the power of federal courts to exert judicial review, John Marshall's ruling did not put an end to controversies surrounding the practice. Among the most interesting of these debates concerns the allegedly antidemocratic nature of judicial review: Why should the Supreme Court (full of unelected officials) be able to strike down laws passed by legislatures (institutions full of elected officials, whose policies presumably represent the wishes of the people)? Or, worse yet, why is the Court able to strike down state initiatives enacted by a majority of voters?These questions took on particular importance during the debate over term limits during the 1990s. Indeed, Justice Thomas's dissent in U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton (1995) poked fun at the antidemocratic nature of the majority opinion: "It is ironic that the Court bases today's decision on the right of the people to "choose whom they please to govern them. . . ." The majority defends [this right] by invalidating a provision that won nearly 60% of the votes cast in a direct election and that carried every congressional district in the State." How might you respond to Justice Thomas?

Q: What level of proof is required for a Terry stop? a. reasonable suspicion b. probable cause. c. preponderance of the evidence. d. no proof is required.

Q: The Supreme Court made the exclusionary rule applicable to the states, holding that "all evidence obtained by searches and seizures in violation of the Constitution are by the same authority inadmissible in state court" in: a. Mapp v. Ohio b. Weeks v. U.S. c. United States v. Leon d. Wolf v. Colorado

Q: The Fourth Amendment regulates the actions of all of the following, except the: a. Internal Revenue Service b. Secret Service c. United Parcel Service d. Food and Drug Administration

Q: In Martin v. Hunter's Lessee what rationale does the Court use to explain why it has the power of judicial review over states and state courts?

Q: Name two ways in which the separation of powers may constrain the decisions made by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Q: All warrants are to be based on: a. a preponderance of the evidence. b. reasonable suspicion. c. proof beyond a reasonable doubt. d. probable cause.

Q: The Supreme Court stated that the exclusionary rule operates as a judicially created remedy designed to safeguard Fourth Amendment rights generally through its deterrent effect, rather than a constitutional right of the person aggrieved in: a. Mapp v. Ohio b. Weeks v. U.S. c. United States v. Leon d. Wolf v. Colorado

Q: Since Flast v. Cohen what two links must taxpayers demonstrate to have standing in Court?

Q: Identify two issues upon which Congress has tried to eliminate the Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction.

Q: The section of the Fourth Amendment makes warrantless searches and seizures valid and constitutional when they are sensible is the: a. warrant clause b. probable cause clause c. reasonableness clause d. privacy clause

Q: The principle that looks at all available information to assess whether the sum total would lead a reasonable person to believe what the officers concluded is the: a. bright line approach b. totality of the circumstances c. individual circumstances d. overall assessment

Q: Give two examples of justiciability standards that a case must meet in order for the Court to decide it.

Q: "Probable cause to search" means: a. having more evidence against a set of probabilities. b. officers reasonably believe that evidence, contraband or other items sought are where they believe them to be. c. that a reasonable person would believe the items may or may not be at a particular location. d. the officers have reasonable suspicion to think the items are where they wish to search.

Q: Explain how the Court's decision in Hamdan differs from its analysis of its jurisdiction in McCardle.

Q: The most commonly used method to determine reasonableness is the case-by-case method, which: a. considers the totality of circumstances in each individual case. b. assigns points to each indicia of reasonableness. c. compares a case to other similar cases. d. considers a specific rule that applies to all cases.

Q: With respect to Marbury v. Madison (1803): (a) Did Marbury have the right to the commission he sought? (b) Was a writ of mandamus a proper remedy for Marbury to seek? (c) Did Marbury take his case to the proper court?

Q: In Marbury v. Madison (1803) the Supreme Court for the first time struck down a provision of federal law because it was in conflict with the U.S Constitution. When did the Court next strike down a federal law?

Q: One way courts have determined reasonableness is the bright line approach, which: a. considers the totality of circumstances in each individual case. b. assigns points to each indicia of reasonableness. c. compares a case to other similar cases. d. considers a specific rule that applies to all cases.

Q: Who has the power to change the Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction?

Q: An unlawful search and seizure can include all of the following consequences, except: a. departmental sanctions. b. criminal liability. c. evidence would be admissible in court. d. civil liability.

Q: The law of stop and frisk deals with that time frame during which officers follow up on their suspicions but before the time that the requisite __________is established to justify an arrest. a. probable cause b. reasonable suspicion c. proof beyond a reasonable doubt d. preponderance of the evidence

Q: Identify one kind of case and one type of litigant that Article III designates as falling under the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction.

Q: The Separation of Powers _______.A. Acts as a constraint on the decisions the Supreme Court makesB. Does not act as a constraint on the decisions the Supreme Court makesC. Allows states to ignore decisions the Supreme Court makesD. Acts as a constraint justices can put on one another as they decide

Q: You are a new police officer riding with a senior sergeant on patrol. As you approach an older man who appears to be down on his luck and wearing old, dirty clothes, the sergeant tells you to pull the car over. He gets out of the car, grabs the disheveled man by the shoulders and pushes him into the nearby wall. He then, quite loudly, demands the man tell him where his brother, a man wanted for many serious offenses, is living. The man immediately gives your sergeant the address and the sergeant gets back into the car. As you drive away, you can tell that the man on the street is slightly injured and terrified that you will return. You are successful in arresting the suspect at the address. Your sergeant can tell that you are uncomfortable and tells you that you need to understand how to talk to people in this neighborhood to get things done or police officers will be at risk. Do you agree? Why or why not?

Q: You are a judge hearing a serious felony case involving receiving stolen goods. It appears that the police mishandled the chain of custody for a vital piece of evidence. You could simply rule that it was a reasonable error and the police officers acted in good faith, which would allow the evidence to come in. The defendant would likely than face conviction of felonies in a sentence of between 15 and 25 years in prison. On the other hand, you are tired of sloppy police work in the city Police Department. What will you do?

Q: In Caperton the Court argued that judges should recuse themselves from cases under what circumstances?A. There is some risk of bias.B. There is serious risk of actual bias.C. Judges should never recuse, as they are always unbiased.D. Judges should always recuse unless they know nothing about the case.

Q: You are a police officer investigating a double homicide. You have suspicion that a particular person may be involved, but do not have probable cause. You follow the individual for several days without developing additional incriminating evidence, but you are convinced the individual is guilty and may very well kill again. When the suspect leaves his apartment, he leaves the front door unlocked. You open the door and see a gun on the coffee table that matches the type forensics has determined fired the fatal bullets in the double homicide. There is no one else in the apartment, so you leave and wait across the street. A few hours later, you see the suspect stumbling towards his apartment, obviously under the influence of alcohol. You wait until he is at his front door and approach him with the idea of arresting him for public intoxication after he opens the door. You do so and, as you arrest the suspect, the gun is in plain view. Based on the arrest and the gun being in plain view, the evidence is seized consistent with the law and will be instrumental in convicting the suspect. No one knows that you had earlier entered the apartment without probable cause, which would render the search suspect and the evidence likely excluded at trial. Does this raise an ethical issue for the police officer? If so, how should the police officer deal with it?

Q: Alexander Hamilton viewed the judiciary as _______.A. The least democratic branch of the federal governmentB. The most democratic branch of the federal governmentC. The most dangerous branch of the federal governmentD. The least dangerous branch of the federal government

Q: Benjamin Franklin's position on the appointment of federal judges was for _______.A. The president to appoint judgesB. Congress to appoint judgesC. Lawyers to appoint judgesD. the Senate to appoint judges

Q: You are a legislator and have been reading the paper about a notorious crime in the capital city. The defendant was acquitted of the charges because her confession was determined inadmissible at trial due to a violation of the defendant's rights. Like everyone else in the state, you are very angry about what has happened. You understand the exclusionary rule, but feel that it simply goes too far and has let a terrible murderer free to walk the streets. You have decided to come up with a state law to address this issue and make sure that this will never happen again. Explain the nature of a state law that would address this issue, justify its use rather than the exclusionary rule, and discuss any possible negative consequences that may result from its use.

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: You are the chief of police in your community and are quite concerned about a recent spike in criminal misconduct in the east part of town. Community leaders are constantly calling your office to complain. You decide that you should have a strong police presence on the streets and direct your officers to walk the beat in the east part of town, rather than use patrol cars. You also direct your police officers to vigorously try to prevent crime by acting proactively by stopping individuals who seem out of place or apprehensive when they see the police officer. As a result, many of these contacts have resulted in stop and frisk activities by the police and crime has dropped significantly in the east part of town. However, now you're getting calls from the same neighborhood asking why a disproportionate number of minorities are being stop and frisked by the police. You have decided to meet with the community leaders to answer this latest concern. What will you tell them?

Q: ______________must be established before a lawful search or arrest can be made, but not before a stop and frisk.

Q: The main function of the Judiciary Act of 1789 was to _______.A. Establish lower federal courtsB. Establish military tribunalsC. Establish the Supreme Court's original jurisdictionD. Establish how judges would be appointed to the federal bench

Q: Where is the origin of the Supreme Court's concept of justiciability?A. Article III of the ConstitutionB. The Judiciary Act of 1789C. Marbury v. MadisonD. Eakin v. Raub

Q: ____________________is not a mathematical formula, but looks at the facts available to a police officer to assess whether the sum total would lead a reasonable person to believe what the police officer concluded.

Q: Which of the following is not one of the "Ashwander Principles" of judicial restraint?A. The Court will not formulate a rule of constitutional law broader than that required by the precise facts to which it is to be applied.B. The Court will not rule on the constitutionality of an act in a suit brought by a party who has benefited from the statute.C. The Court will not rule on the constitutionality of an act if there is a way to decide the dispute without ruling on the constitutional question.D. The Court will not anticipate a question of constitutional law in advance of the necessity of deciding it.E. The Court will not rule on the constitutionality of an act in a suit involving friendly, nonadversarial parties.F. None of the above. All of the above are contained in the "Ashwander Principles".

Q: One of the earliest definitions of __________was that it means less than evidence which would justify condemnation or conviction.

Q: Federal courts are explicitly given the power of judicial review by _______.A. Article I of the Constitution, which describes the process of how laws are passed and repealedB. Article III, which specifies the powers of the courtsC. the Supremacy ClauseD. the Eleventh AmendmentE. the Fourteenth AmendmentF. None of the above

Q: The Constitution does not provide an absolute right to be free from government intrusion, but only__________________.

Q: Reasonableness is determined by a specific rule applying to all cases in the ____________.

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: Ex parte McCardle (1869; appeal of a journalist held for trial before a military tribunal) _______.A. upheld the authority of Congress to alter the Supreme Court's appellate jurisdictionB. struck down the law removing the Supreme Court's jurisdiction to hear McCardle's appealC. held that habeas corpus rights could not be altered by CongressD. upheld the constitutionality of criminal libel laws

Q: The two approaches that have been used to determine reasonableness with respect to the Fourth Amendment are the bright-line approach and thea. blue-line methodology. b. case-law approach.c. case-by-case method.d. common-law approach.

Q: Justice Story's opinion for the Court in Martin v. Hunter's Lessee (1816; Virginia land inheritance case) is an example of the Marshall Court's _______.A. support of congressional power over power exercised by the state legislaturesB. efforts to assert the power of the Supreme Court over the state supreme courtsC. efforts to provide sufficient power to the federal government to build a strong national economyD. support of the federal taxation powerE. opposition to state taxes that have a negative impact on the operations of the federal government

Q: As stated in the case of United States v. Knights, the touchstone of the Fourth Amendment isa. legal sufficiency.b. expectations of police. c. reasonableness.d. safety.

Q: The legal, attitudinal, and strategic models provide competing explanations for how the Supreme Court justices make decisions. Explain the main tenets of each model and give examples. Then make an argument for the model you believe provides the best (most realistic) view of how the justices actually make decisions.

Q: The Supreme Court ruled that an airline employee inspecting a defendant's luggage was covered by the Fourth Amendment in the case ofa. United States v. Rossb. Wolf v. Coloradoc. United States v. Cleavelandd. United States v. Parker

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: Explain how Stare Devises constrains the decisions justices make.

Q: Describe (with examples) three external constraints faced by Supreme Court justices.

Q: Explain the difference between judicial activism and judicial restraint.. Give an example of each.

Q: Explain the difference between textualism and original meaning. Give at least one example.

Q: The Supreme Court allowed United Parcel Service employees to open packages without a warrant to inspect contents of the package for insurance purposes in the case of a. United States v. UPS b. United States v. Parker c. United States v. Ross d. Wolf v. Colorado

Q: What response options does a justice have once an opinion is circulated?

Q: You live in a state that allows anyone with a permit to carry a handgun concealed or out in the open. Some students object to the fact that your campus does not permit students to carry firearms into classes or keep them in dormitories. The policy was enacted 10 years ago after a tragic shooting on the campus. There have been no incidents since then. You are the Provost of the school and had just received a written request from a small student organization asking that the current firearms policy be suspended as an unfair infringement on Second Amendment rights. You are reluctant to do so. How would you respond to student request and the college community at large?

Q: You have just found out that in your home state it is easy to buy guns from unlicensed sellers at gun shows who collect no tax, conduct no background checks, and do not require the buyers to even show a driver's license. The state is drafting legislation to require background checks at all gun shows. Assume that you have been tasked to investigate the issue for your school paper before it comes out with an opinion on the proposed law. What facts would you research to help your editor prepare the opinion?

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 Supreme Court's Rule 10, what makes a case "certworthy"?

Q: You are the superintendent of schools and have become quite concerned about the number of shootings that have occurred nationally at schools. Some of the teachers feel that there should be more lockdown drills with simulated entry of the school by armed attackers to see how well the students and teachers lock doors and otherwise protect students from this threat. Other teachers are asking that the drills be reduced in number because students are starting to feel anxious and threatened. How do you balance these concerns? What types of questions should you ask before making your final decision?

Q: Your governor is getting ready to sign a new law in your state called the "Constitutional Right to Carry Act" that will eliminate the state's permit and training requirements for citizens who want to carry guns. This means that a resident of your state who wants to carry a weapon, concealed or otherwise, can do so without a test, a background check, or gun safety test. Balancing the right to bear arms against the need to control gun violence, present a brief opinion on the advisability of such a law.

Q: Describe the structure of the U.S. judicial system.

Q: What is the main way in which interest groups try to influence the Supreme Court?A. They give justices donations each holiday.B. They meet with the justices twice a year to persuade them to change their votes.C. They file amicus curiae briefs.D. They file arguments on the Supreme Court's Facebook page.

Q: Gun-control advocates, including the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, have criticized the "Stand Your Ground" laws that have been passed in many states. These laws expanded the definition of justifiable self-defense and provide that anyone claiming to feel threatened no longer has an obligation to treat or avoid use of deadly force. Assume you are defending a woman accused of shooting a young girl who knocked on her front door late at night. Your client had heard about break-ins in the local area over the television news and thought she was about to be robbed. The girl at the door was actually looking for help because her car had become stuck in a snowbank at the foot of your client's driveway. Based on the facts and any reasonable fact you can add to the scenario, how would you convince a jury that your client should not be convicted of shooting the young girl? Assume you are successful in your argument and it appears that you have convinced a jury your client was in fear. If the fear needs to be a reasonable one, how would the prosecutor counter your argument most effectively?

Q: Why should the U.S. Supreme Court pay attention to the preferences of the president?A. The president enforces the decisions the Court makes.B. The president can yell at the justices during the State of the Union address.C. The president can veto decisions he does not like.D. None of the above.

Q: A federal district court analyzed gun control ordinance under a text, history, and tradition approach to explain why the law was unconstitutional in the case of _____________.

Q: In the case of _____________, the Supreme Court allowed for reasonable restrictions on firearms.

Q: An activist Supreme Court justice is likely to _______.A. Uphold state legislationB. Strike down federal legislationC. Strike down state legislationD. Uphold federal legislationE. A and DF. B and CG. None of the above.

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: Justice William Douglas supported the proposition that stiff laws governing the purchase and possession of pistols can be enacted in the case of _____________.

Q: The Supreme Court refused to incorporate the Second Amendment into the 14th amendment in the case of ____________.