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
Tax Law
Q:
Since the Supreme Courts ruling in R.A.V. v. St. Paul, anti-hate speech ordinances are presumptively constitutional.
Q:
In Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that public schools may punish disruptive student protests that disturb educational activities.
Q:
The doctrine of the hecklers veto protects the free speech rights of minorities by giving lone dissenters equal rights to speak as individuals chosen as part of an organized speech activity.
Q:
The doctrine that permits government to restrict First Amendment rights when restrictions are needed to prevent an extremely serious and imminent harm is called the clear and present danger standard.
Q:
Given the role of the schools in inculcating values and teaching social responsibility, the U.S. Supreme Court in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District said school officials may prohibit student speech that might potentially disrupt school activities.
Q:
Hate speech is a legally defined category that the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled does not deserve First Amendment protection.
Q:
In Brandenburg v. Ohio, the U.S. Supreme Court said the advocacy of violence is protected speech unless it is intended to and likely to incite imminent violence or illegal activity.
Q:
Incorporation is the name of the concept that the Fourteenth Amendment extends the reach of the Bill of Rights to apply equally to state governments.
Q:
The First Amendment protects an individuals right not to speak and limits the power of government to force individuals to sign oaths or join particular groups.
Q:
True threats, which are directed at an individual with the intent and likelihood of causing the listener to fear bodily harm, are one category of punishable speech.
Q:
The First Amendment favors underinclusive laws because they target only a subset of a natural group of expression for regulation.
Q:
Although the Supreme Courts decision in Elonis v. United States did not clearly define them, the Court previously established that true threats may be punishable when ______.
a. the average person applying reasonable standards would perceive a possible threat
b. a reasonable listener might feel threatened
c. a sensitive listener might feel threatened
d. the speaker intends to threaten physical harm or to create pervasive fear in a targeted individual or group
Q:
Symbolic speech exists when ______.
a. actions are closely related to speech and are intended to send a message that others will understand
b. symbols other than the alphabet convey messages
c. actions convey any meaning to another person regardless of intent or context
d. none of these
Q:
The U.S. Supreme Courts speech distinctions establish ______.
a. unclear and confusing categories of speech with differing levels of protection under the First Amendment
b. clear and consistent categories of speech that relate to explicit language in the First Amendment
c. clear categories with clear reasoning for lower courts to follow
d. none of these
Q:
Supreme Court decisions establish clearly that students in public schools (K12) ______. a. enjoy the same protection of school-related speech as do university students b. may have their school-related speech restricted to serve other important government interests c. may never have their school-related speech restricted by school authorities d. enjoy no freedom of speech in school
Q:
When a law is challenged as applied, courts judge the laws constitutionality based entirely on the language of the law.
Q:
The U.S. Supreme Court struck down the anti-hate ordinance at issue in R.A.V. v. St. Paul in part because the law was underinclusive.
Q:
Students in all public educational institutions, whether primary schools or universities, enjoy the same protection from regulation of their speech.
Q:
When the court weighs different categories of speech against competing interests, it is using ad hoc balancing to determine First Amendment protections.
Q:
Sybil often played the video game Die Now. One afternoon, Sybil deliberately ran her car into Jamess car. James sued the makers of Die Now, claiming the game caused Sybil to become aggressive and cause Jamess injuries. If a court applies the incitement test to determine if the Die Now manufacturer was responsible for Jamess injury, James must prove the manufacturer ______.
a. should have done more testing to determine the games effects
b. should have foreseen that playing the game could cause someone to injure another person
c. was negligent in manufacturing the game
d. intentionally meant for game players to become aggressive and cause harm
Q:
The Supreme Courts categories of speech provide ______.
a. clear and consistent decision-making
b. fuzzy boundaries with decisions that rely heavily on the circumstances and the consequences of the specific speech act
c. an alternative to categorical balancing
d. none of these
Q:
The types of speech that threaten national security ______.
a. vacillate with the political and social climate of the times
b. are clearly defined in one federal statute
c. are clearly defined in one Supreme Court ruling
d. are established through international treaties and agreements
Q:
Wars generally, and the current war on terror specifically, ______.
a. increase the willingness of Congress and the Supreme Court to accept laws that punish speech that might undermine national security and international effectiveness
b. increase the willingness of Congress and the Supreme Court to counterbalance the tendency to stifle speech during times of heightened anxiety
c. have no demonstrable effect on First Amendment jurisprudence
d. decrease the willingness of Congress and the Supreme Court to accept laws that target dissent and association
Q:
The chilling effect occurs when ______.
a. the Supreme Court strikes down federal statutes designed to protect national security and tranquility
b. Congress criticizes the actions of either of the other two branches of federal government
c. laws do not clearly define the illegal conduct they punish
d. you get a headache because you eat ice cream too rapidly
Q:
If a court uses the incitement test when a mass medium is sued for causing physical harm, the plaintiff ______.
a. has to prove only that s/he was harmed by the medium
b. almost always wins
c. usually wins if the damage is physical
d. rarely wins
Q:
Research shows a real but uncertain link between media depictions of violence and violent actions by viewers. As a result, ______.
a. media are required by law to limit the amount and degree of violent content in all their products
b. successful lawsuits for media negligence must show the media were the proximate cause of the harm they could reasonably foresee
c. media defendants almost always lose when sued for physical harm
d. courts presume that media are the proximate cause of viewer violence
Q:
Under the Supreme Courts decision in Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, government may punish fighting words when speech ______.
a. has a bad tendency
b. generally inflames and angers individuals
c. is directed at an individual and prompts immediate violence or inflicts emotional harm
d. contributes little of value to democratic debate and encourages dislike of historically discriminated groups
Q:
In a physical harm lawsuit, a direct relationship between the plaintiffs action and the defendants injury is called ______.
a. proximate cause
b. factual cause
c. negligence
d. intentional injury
Q:
Chilling effect is the name used to describe ______.
a. a policy to segregate political protestors to avoid violence
b. the tendency for unclear government regulations to discourage the exercise of constitutionally protected rights
c. the tendency for forceful speakers to shut out alternative views
d. the tendency for open debate to move people from sharp disagreement toward consensus
Q:
The explicit text of the U.S. Constitution ______.
a. establishes that First Amendment rights are not equal for children and adults
b. establishes government authority to control all expression within public schools
c. establishes public universities as public forums where the content of speech may not be regulated
d. says nothing about different First Amendment rights for children and adults
Q:
The Supreme Court has found that public schools may regulate student expression when it ______.
a. disrupts education
b. is lewd or obscene
c. is sponsored by the school or is likely to be understood to represent the school
d. all of these
Q:
The First Amendment ______.
a. protects the right of citizens to assemble in non-violent gatherings
b. protects the right of citizens to assemble and disrupt the peace
c. provides protection for unlicensed assemblies
d. says nothing about public assemblies
Q:
The U.S. Supreme Court has said the First Amendment requires particularly sensitive or vulnerable individuals ______.
a. to be protected from offense, upset, and disquiet
b. to be forewarned of any potentially offensive expression
c. to avert their eyes and ignore most offensive expression
d. to be given equal time in any public forum to respond to offensive expression
Q:
Laws that make viewpoint-based discriminations are ______.
a. especially objectionable to the First Amendment
b. reviewed under rational review
c. content-neutral
d. generally constitutional
Q:
XYZ television network presents a movie showing two 10-year-old boys playing with a gun owned by one of the childrens parents. The gun accidentally fires, severely injuring one of the boys. Shortly after the movie runs, two young brothers find a gun in their house. While playing with the gun, the gun fires and kills one of the boys. The brothers parents sue XYZ television network. The parents will ______.
a. lose because XYZ television network could not have foreseen that those children would watch the movie and try to imitate what they saw
b. lose because XYZ television network did not know a rifle can be dangerous
c. win because XYZ television network intended to harm a viewer
d. win because XYZ television network owed a duty to the dead child and breached the duty
Q:
A newspaper published a classified advertisement that said, Having trouble? Need to remove someone? Contact me to get rid of your problems. Bill. Dick hired Bill to kill his golfing partner, Frank. Franks family sued the newspaper. A court likely would find ______.
a. a reasonable person could not understand the advertisement meant murder for hire
b. the newspapers free speech rights protect all the ads it runs
c. a reasonable person should have known the advertisement had a substantial likelihood of causing harm
d. the newspaper is not responsible for the ad even if it could be understood as meaning murder for hire
Q:
A pharmacist wrote a book about drugs people can buy without a prescription. The author said Drmxz, an over-the-counter cold medication, had no side effects. However, Drmzx can cause serious problems in people who have liver problems. Cheryl, who has liver trouble, read the book, bought and took Drmzx, and suffered severe symptoms. Cheryl sued the book publisher for causing her injuries. Cheryl likely will ______.
a. win, because publishers are responsible when they distribute a book with a mistake
b. win, but only if the medication came close to killing Cheryl
c. win, but only if the pharmacist is an expert on cold medications and liver problems
d. lose, because courts say book publishers cannot verify all the information in every book they publish
Q:
Use the Supreme Courts 2015 ruling in Reed v. Town of Gilbert to discuss the distinction made between content-based and content-neutral regulations of speech.
Q:
Fighting words ______.
a. are words said in the heat of the moment
b. threaten to immediately disturb the peace
c. are not part of the exchange of ideas
d. are legally obscene
Q:
Categorical balancing ______.
a. balances different categories of speech against each other to create a hierarchy of speech rights
b. establishes that speech rights always outweigh competing interests
c. distinguishes the protection of speech based on the identity of the speaker
d. examines where speech occurs as the basis for protection
Q:
The First Amendments protection of disruptive speech ______.
a. is variable and uncertain
b. is stable regardless of political, economic, or social conditions
c. is greatest when the U.S. Supreme Court applies the clear and present danger test
d. is variable and uncertain and is greatest when the U.S. Supreme Court applies the clear and present danger test
Q:
Laws that protect national security by punishing speakers who incite violent actions are ______.
a. always unconstitutional
b. always constitutional
c. unconstitutional even when the speech incites extreme and immediate violent acts to overthrow government
d. constitutional if they pass the Brandenburg test
Q:
The clear and present danger test ______.
a. was adopted by the U.S. Supreme Court after it found the bad tendency test allowed government to punish too much harmless speech
b. was abandoned and replaced by the bad tendency test
c. was influential but was never adopted by the full U.S. Supreme Court or used to decide any cases
d. was adopted by the U.S. Supreme Court after it found the bad tendency test allowed government to punish too much harmless speech and was abandoned and replaced by the bad tendency test
Q:
Using principles and Supreme Court decisions you have learned in the first two chapters of the text, briefly explain why the governor of Missouris emergency executive order banning night-time protests likely would be found constitutional even if it restricts the protesters rights of freedom of speech and assembly.
Q:
Explain briefly the decision and reasoning of two Supreme Court rulings that establish but limit the control of government over government employee speech.
Q:
The First Amendment protection for freedom of expression means prior restraints by government are constitutional only as a last resort to meet a compelling need.
Q:
Both content-based and viewpoint-based regulations target speech because of government disfavor with the ideas expressed.
Q:
The First Amendment does not limit the power of state or local legislatures.
Q:
In ad hoc balancing, courts employ strict rules of statutory interpretation.
Q:
Truthful criticism of government was punished under sedition laws.
Q:
The First Amendment is a nearly complete ban to prior restraints.
Q:
To be constitutional under strict scrutiny review, a law must reasonably advance an important government interest.
Q:
Content-neutral time, place, and manner restrictions must pass strict scrutiny in order to be constitutional.
Q:
Discuss the role of public forums with regard to free speech. Be sure to define the different categories of forums and explain why they exist.
Q:
What was the U.S. Supreme Courts decision in Near v. Minnesota (the Saturday Press case)?
Q:
After New York Times v. United States, is prior restraint of media ever possible in the United States? Explain briefly.
Q:
Because content-based laws pose a greater risk to the freedom of speech and of the press than do content-neutral laws, the U.S. Supreme Court uses a more lenient test to determine when content-neutral laws are constitutional.
Q:
Private property that is used by the public is called a traditional public forum.
Q:
Originalists believe that interpretation of the Constitution should be guided by the actual text of the document.
Q:
Functionalists, or instrumentalists, believe that the First Amendment protects the freedom of speech and of the press only because these freedoms advance important societal goals, such as democracy.
Q:
A classical prior restraint imposes broad government power to review and select acceptable content before ideas are published.
Q:
Court injunctions that stop publication are always unconstitutional prior restraints.
Q:
The government bears an exceptionally heavy burden of proof to justify any prior restraint because prior restraints are inherently likely to distort the marketplace of ideas and to punish ideas that government disfavors.
Q:
Content-based laws must pass intermediate scrutiny to be constitutional.
Q:
Government regulations that target the content of speech because of government disfavor with the ideas expressed are called content-neutral.
Q:
Through its self-delegated power to interpret and apply the U.S. Constitution, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that the First Amendment limits the power of state legislatures as well as Congress.
Q:
Justices who rely on original intent to determine the correct meaning and application of the First Amendment argue that the framers understood and left a clear record of the meaning of the freedom of speech and of the press.
Q:
Ad hoc balancing is used to determine the proper awards or penalties when judges make equity rulings.
Q:
The U.S. Supreme Court consistently has interpreted the free press clause of the First Amendment to confer special privileges and responsibilities on the press.
Q:
The crime of sedition punishes truthful criticism of government.
Q:
The U.S. Supreme Court has said that prior restraint is sometimes necessary to counterbalance the power of large media corporations to drown out alternate voices and different ideas.
Q:
John Milton said that the open exchange of ideas in an unfettered marketplace will allow convincing falsehoods to overcome the truth.
Q:
The social contract is part of the First Amendment that requires the people to act responsibly in exchange for their freedoms.
Q:
Throughout history, the U.S. Supreme Court has relied heavily on natural rights theory to guide its First Amendment interpretations because this theory provides clear boundaries to personal liberties.
Q:
The First Amendment stands as a nearly absolute ban to prior restraint.
Q:
In the area of government speech, the U.S. Supreme Court has ______.
a. said the First Amendment clearly establishes absolute protection of the freedom of speech of individual government speakers
b. found the First Amendment does not deal expressly with government speech or speakers
c. held that the government has unlimited control over all the speech of its agencies and employees
d. established clear and consistent precedents when regulation of government speech and speakers is constitutional
Q:
Traditional public forums include ______.
a. all online spaces (such as chat rooms) and all public properties
b. any government property that is not involved with national security
c. public property designed and historically used for public gathering and association
d. public property designed for other purposes but available for public use
Q:
When government funds activities that involve expression, it ______.
a. always creates a public forum
b. never creates a public forum
c. may not discriminate on the basis of the content of expression if it creates a public forum
d. may always discriminate on the basis of the content of expression
Q:
In Reed v. Town of Gilbert, the Supreme Court held that laws ______. a. that refer to categories of speech are content neutral b. are never facially unconstitutional c. that distinguish treatment based on the message are content-based d. prohibiting live music after 7 p.m. are overbroad
Q:
A traditional public forum is closed to nongovernment users to protect the core purpose of the property.