Chapter Thirteen Civil Liberties Multiple Choice 1. The fundamental rights of American citizens are found in the a. Mayflower Compact. b. Bill of Rights. c. Declaration of Independence. d. Articles of Confederation. e. Ten Commandments. Answer: b. Bill of Rights. 2. Which of the following is NOT a civil liberty? a. speech b. religion c. publishing d. driving an automobile e. due process Answer: d. driving an automobile 3. Civil rights are protections against a. home foreclosures. b. dishonorable discharges from military services. c. consumer fraud. d. arbitrary discrimination. e. voting fraud. Answer: d. arbitrary discrimination. 4. The case of United States v. Carolene dealt with Congress’s regulation of a. “filled milk.” b. gasoline. c. alcohol. d. movies. e. money. Answer: a. “filled milk.” 5. Civil liberties have been expanded through a. a series of Supreme Court decisions. b. a collection of congressional statutes. c. a number of executive orders. d. riots in urban areas. e. referendums. Answer: a. a series of Supreme Court decisions. 6. When was the Burger Court in existence? a. 1932-1940 b. 1953-1960 c. 1969-1986 d. 1990-1996 e. 1996-2000 Answer: c. 1969-1986 7. Civil liberties were most notably expanded under the a. Roberts Court b. Rehnquist Court c. Burger Court d. Holmes Court. e. Warren Court. Answer: e. Warren Court. 8. In which of the following cases was the Fifth Amendment guarantee of eminent domain imposed upon the states? a. NAACP v. Alabama (1958) b. Palko v. Connecticut (1937) c. Chicago, Burlington, and Quincy Railway Company v. Chicago (1987) d. Powell v. Alabama (1932) e. Near v. Minnesota (1931) Answer: c. Chicago, Burlington, and Quincy Railway Company v. Chicago (1987) 9. The case of Barron v. Baltimore a. had no impact upon the contemporary interpretation of the national constitution. b. had a tremendous impact upon the contemporary interpretation of the national constitution. c. was not decided by the Supreme Court of the United States. d. was overturned by the Civil Rights Cases. e. was returned to the lower federal courts for decision. Answer: a. had no impact upon the contemporary interpretation of the national constitution. 10. The Fourteenth Amendment was passed in a. 1828 b. 1838 c. 1848 d. 1858 e. 1868 Answer: e. 1868 11. The process whereby the Supreme Court found the protections of the Bill of Rights applies to states is known as a. incorporation. b. incapsulation. c. integration. d. interpretation. e. intergovernmentalism. Answer: a. incorporation. 12. Prior to the incorporation process, the Fourteenth Amendment a. applied only to the national government. b. applied only to the state governments. c. applied only to the local governments. d. was never invoked. e. applied to international governments. Answer: a. applied only to the national government. 13. When did the ratification of the Bill of Rights to the Constitution take place? a. 1777 b. 1791 c. 1800 d. 1805 e. 1821 Answer: b. 1791 14. Which amendment guarantees the right to counsel? a. First b. Sixth c. Tenth d. Twelfth e. Fourteenth Answer: b. Sixth 15. Chief Justice John Marshall a. favored states rights. b. was nationalist-oriented. c. was successfully impeached. d. only participated in relatively minor cases. e. was racist. Answer: b. was nationalist-oriented. 16. During the period beginning in the late 1880s and ending in the early 1900s, the Supreme Court was dominated by a. conservatives. b. liberals. c. Civil War veterans. d. socialists. e. communists. Answer: a. conservatives. 17. The process of extending the national Bill of Rights to the states is called a. no incorporation. b. incorporation. c. selective incorporation. d. total incorporation. e. nationalization. Answer: b. incorporation. 18. The first important case involving freedom of speech was a. Barron v. Baltimore. b. Garcia v. City of Chicago. c. Marbury v. Madison. d. Schenck v. United States. e. Mapp v. Ohio Answer: d. Schenck v. United States. 19. The clear and present danger test was first argued by a. John Marshall. b. Bushrod Washington. c. Oliver Wendell Holmes. d. William Rehnquist. e. John Roberts Answer: c. Oliver Wendell Holmes. 20. __________ is a free speech test allowing states to regulate only speech that has an immediate connection to an action states are permitted to regulate. a. The clear and present danger test b. The imminent harm test c. The double jeopardy standard d. Selective incorporation e. Total incorporation Answer: a. The clear and present danger test 21. The Supreme Court ruled for the first time that the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of speech could be applied to the states in the case of a. Gitlow v. New York. b. Michael M. v. Sonoma County. c. Powell v. Alabama. d. Near v. Minnesota. e. Mapp v. Ohio Answer: a. Gitlow v. New York. 22. __________ refers to the trying of a defendant twice for the same crime. a. Incorporation b. Selective incoporation c. Clear and present danger d. Judicial redefinition e. Double jeopardy Answer: e. Double jeopardy 23. In Powell v. Alabama (the Scottsboro case), the Supreme Court ruled the right to counsel, as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment, applied only to a. civil cases. b. capital cases. c. divorce cases. d. cases involving minors. e. local cases. Answer: b. capital cases. 24. In the case of Palko v. Connecticut, the Supreme Court ruled that the Fifth Amendment prohibition against double jeopardy a. was not a fundamental freedom. b. was a fundamental freedom. c. could only be invoked in civil cases. d. was unconstitutional. e. could only be invoked in capital cases. Answer: a. was not a fundamental freedom. 25. Which of the following is an example of symbolic speech? a. shouting “fire” in a crowded theater b. flag burning c. political commentary on the evening news d. libel e. child pornography Answer: b. flag burning 26. Which of the following amendments have NOT been incorporated? a. the Sixth Amendment b. the Fourth Amendment c. the Second Amendment d. the First Amendment e. the Fifth Amendment Answer: c. the Second Amendment 27. The government accommodation position on religion was first articulated in the case of a. Roe v. Wade. b. Everson v. Board of Education of Ewing Township. c. Plessy v. Ferguson. d. City of Boerne v. Flores. e. Mapp v. Ohio Answer: b. Everson v. Board of Education of Ewing Township. 28. The __________ was best described in 1962 when the Court ruled that a brief nondenominational prayer led by a teacher in a public school was unconstitutional in Engel v. Vitale. a. government accommodation position b. high wall of separation doctrine c. clear and present danger rule d. double standard rule e. double jeopardy rule Answer: b. high wall of separation doctrine 29. In recent years, the Court has become a. more accommodating toward religion. b. less accommodating toward religion. c. willing to hear more cases involving religious issues. d. unwilling to hear cases involving religious issues. e. refers all religious cases back to the federal courts. Answer: a. more accommodating toward religion. 30. In which case did the Supreme Court rule that a nondenominational prayer led by a teacher in public school was unconstitutional? a. Roe v. Wade. b. Everson v. Board of Education of Ewing Township. c. Plessy v. Ferguson. d. City of Boerne v. Flores. e. Engel v. Vitale Answer: e. Engel v. Vitale 31. The Lemon test is used to determine the permissible level of state aid for a. religious schools. b. homeless shelters. c. colleges. d. hospitals. e. charities. Answer: a. religious schools. 32. The secular regulation rule holds that a. a religious organization cannot accept donations from non-members. b. a church cannot hold services after midnight. c. there is no constitutional right to exemption on free exercise grounds from laws dealing with nonreligious matters. d. religious symbols cannot be displayed on public property. e. a religious organization cannot accept donations from state government. Answer: c. there is no constitutional right to exemption on free exercise grounds from laws dealing with nonreligious matters. 33. The least restrictive means test is a. a revision of the secular regulation rule. b. a nullification of the secular regulation rule. c. the same as the secular regulation rule. d. not at all related to the secular regulation rule. e. None of the Above Answer: a. a revision of the secular regulation rule. 34. The Religious Freedom Restoration Act was overturned in the case of a. Near v. Minnesota. b. City of Boerne v. Flores. c. Rotgut v. Taylor. d. UCLA v. Griffith. e. Mapp. V. Ohio Answer: b. City of Boerne v. Flores. 35. The idea that speech must be absolutely protected was argued by a. John Marshall. b. Alexander Meiklejohn. c. Thurgood Marshall. d. Samuel Chase. e. Oliver Wendall Holmes. Answer: b. Alexander Meiklejohn. 36. The sliding scale test made it a. easier for a state to restrict speech. b. more difficult for a state to restrict speech. c. easier for an individual to prove discrimination. d. more difficult for an individual to prove discrimination. e. easier for the local government to restrict speech. Answer: a. easier for a state to restrict speech. 37. In the 1999 term, the Supreme Court opened the door for further campaign finance reform by ruling in a Missouri case that a. money and politics do not mix. b. limits on individual contributions are constitutional. c. only businesses could contribute to political campaigns. d. individual contributions could only be spent on issue ads. e. individuals would not be allowed to make private contributions. Answer: b. limits on individual contributions are constitutional. 38. Not until _______ did the Court become willing to protect the speech of Communists as long as they were not actively plotting to overthrow the government. a. 1865 b. 1902 c. 1957 d. 1998 e. 2001 Answer: c. 1957 39. __________ involve[s] certain expressions that are so volatile that they are deemed to incite injury and are therefore not protected under the First Amendment. a. Hate speech b. Fighting words c. Symbolic speech d. Provocative speech e. Pornographic speech Answer: b. Fighting words 40. __________ consists of speech or symbolic gestures intended to inflict emotional distress, to defame, or to intimidate people. a. Pornographic speech b. Fighting words c. Symbolic speech d. Provocative speech e. Hate speech Answer: e. Hate speech 41. Laws prohibiting libel and obscenity are examples of a. prior restraint. b. subsequent punishment. c. selective incorporation. d. clear and present danger. e. Hate speech Answer: b. subsequent punishment. 42. Speech which damages a person’s reputation is called a. libel. b. slander. c. hate speech. d. symbolic speech. e. provocative speech. Answer: b. slander. 43. The Supreme Court established the “average person standard” in the case of a. Roth v. United States. b. Buckley v. Valeo. c. Sullivan v. New York Times. d. Katzenbach v. McClung. e. Near v. Minnesota Answer: a. Roth v. United States. 44. The major obstacle to developing a definitive standard for obscenity cases is that obscenity is a. very popular. b. very difficult to define. c. very rare. d. clearly protected under the First Amendment. e. none of the above. Answer: b. very difficult to define. 45. Congress passed the Communications Decency Act to a. prohibit obscene materials from being sent through the mail. b. prohibit obscene materials from being transmitted via fax machines. c. prohibit obscene materials from being transmitted over the Internet. d. prohibit obscene phone calls. e. prohibit the sale of all obscene materials. Answer: c. prohibit obscene materials from being transmitted over the Internet. 46. The most significant case involving prior restraint was a. the Pentagon Papers case. b. the Watergate case. c. the Des Moines School District case. d. the Tinker case. e. the Iran Contra Case Answer: a. the Pentagon Papers case. 47. The exclusionary rule was created in a. 1846. b. 1903. c. 1914. d. 1963. e. 1954 Answer: c. 1914. 48. The exclusionary rule was not extended to the states until a. 1935. b. 1942. c. 1955. d. 1961. e. 1979. Answer: d. 1961. 49. The Fourth Amendment was extended to the states in the case of a. Palko v. Connecticut. b. Mapp v. Ohio. c. Weeks v. United States. d. United States v. Leon. e. Weeks v. United States Answer: b. Mapp v. Ohio. 50. The good faith exception a. was an attempt to revise the exclusionary rule. b. was developed in 1994. c. has strengthened the guarantees of the Fourth Amendment. d. violates the separation of church and state. e. strengthens the first amendment. Answer: a. was an attempt to revise the exclusionary rule. 51. __________ is a reasonable belief that a crime has been, is being, or is about to be committed. a. Probable cause b. Double jeopardy c. Prior restraint d. Selective incorporation e. Reasonably objective Answer: a. Probable cause 52. What amendment provides the right to a grand jury? a. Third Amendment. b. Fourth Amendment. c. Fifth Amendment. d. Sixth Amendment. e. First Amendment Answer: c. Fifth Amendment. 53. The Miranda warning was established in a. 1843. b. 1936. c. 1966. d. 1973. e. 1988. Answer: c. 1966. 54. A significant case involving the right against self-incrimination was a. the 1925 Gitlow v. New York case. b. the 1940 Cantwell v. Connecticut case. c. the 1949 Wolf v. Colorado case. d. the 1964 Escobedo v. Illinois case. e. the 2009 Herring v. United States case. Answer: d. the 1964 Escobedo v. Illinois case. 55. Which group of the following groups of amendments form the zone of privacy within which the right to privacy may exist? a. the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth b. the Tenth, Eleventh, and Nineteenth c. the Thirteenth, Fifteenth, and Seventeenth d. the Twentieth, Twenty-third, and Thirtieth e. the Third, Fifth, Sixth and Tenth. Answer: a. the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth 56. In which of the following cases did the Supreme Court establish that a state cannot prohibit a married couple from using birth control devices? a. Romer v. Evans b. Hardwick v. Bowers c. Griswold v. Connecticut d. Roe v. Wade e. Herring v. United States Answer: c. Griswold v. Connecticut 57. In which case did the Supreme Court determine that the right to privacy was broad enough to encompass a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy? a. Mann v. Ohio b. Roe v. Wade c. Romer v. Evans d. Griswold v. Connecticut e. Hardwick v. Bowers Answer: b. Roe v. Wade 58. Since the Roe decision, abortion rights have been a. expanded. b. limited. c. terminated. d. unchanged. e. None of the above. Answer: b. limited. 59. The case of Webster v. Reproductive Health Services was decided in a. 1973. b. 1980. c. 1984. d. 1989. e. 1999. Answer: d. 1989. 60. In what year did the Supreme Court rule that executing a minor was “cruel and unusual punishment”? a. 2001 b. 2002 c. 2003 d. 2004 e. 2005 Answer: e. 2005 True or False 61. Civil liberties and civil rights are synonymous. Answer: False 62. Civil liberties are best understood as freedom from government interference with individual freedoms. Answer: True 63. Civil rights may best be understood as negative freedoms. Answer: False 64. The constitutional basis for civil liberties is the Tenth Amendment. Answer: False 65. The history of civil liberties is one of gradual expansion. Answer: True 66. The varying level of intensity by which the Supreme Court considers cases by which it protect civil liberties claims while also deferring to the legislature in cases with economic claims is known as double standard. Answer: True 67. In the early years of the nation’s history, the Bill of Rights provided far less protection for individual rights than is the case today. Answer: True 68. Even the normally nationalist-oriented Chief Justice John Marshall refused to extend the Bill of Rights to protections to the states as occurred in the case of Barron v. Baltimore. Answer: True 69. The Fourteenth Amendment is considered a WWII amendment. Answer: False 70. The Fourteenth Amendment was designed to free slaves and protect their rights as citizens. Answer: True 71. Incorporation is the process whereby the protections of the Thirteenth Amendment are applied to the states. Answer: False 72. Justice John Harlan was a proponent of total incorporation. Answer: True 73. Total incorporation is the idea that the entire Bill of Rights should be applied to the states by absorbing them into the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Answer: True 74. The Supreme Court has ruled that wartime crisis was an insufficient cause for restriction on the freedom of speech. Answer: False 75. In Gitlow v. New York, the Supreme Court upheld New York’s Criminal Anarchy Act. Answer: True 76. Double jeopardy is prohibited by the First Amendment. Answer: False 77. The Constitution prohibits the government from establishing a religion. Answer: True 78. In the early 1980s, changes in the makeup of the Court produced a shift toward a more accommodating position regarding state aid to religion. Answer: True 79. Free exercise cases usually involve a law that applies to everyone but is perceived as imposing a hardship on a particular religious group. Answer: True 80. The secular regulation rule was nullified in 1997. Answer: False 81. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes believed that speech should be restricted only when its consequences endanger the state. Answer: True 82. Not until 1957 did the Court become willing to protect the speech of Communists as long as they were not actively plotting to overthrow the government. Answer: True 83. Not all speech involves words. Answer: True 84. Verbal expressions or symbolic actions intended to inflict emotional distress or to intimidate are called hate speech. Answer: True 85. The burning of crosses and the painting of swastikas are considered symbolic speech. Answer: True 86. Certain expressions so volatile that they are deemed to incite injury are known as fighting words. Answer: True 87. Prior restraint permits the press to reveal intimate details of a private citizen’s life without his or her permission. Answer: False 88. The Pentagon Papers was never published. Answer: False 89. Published materials that damage a person’s good reputation in an untruthful or malicious matter is called libel. Answer: True 90. Obscene material is protected by the First Amendment. Answer: False 91. Slander is speech that is untruthful, malicious or damaging to a person’s reputation and thus not protected by the First Amendment. Answer: True 92. The rights guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment were expanded in the 1960s. Answer: True 93. The exclusionary rule was declared unconstitutional in 1986. Answer: False 94. The good faith exception was created in 1984. Answer: True 95. The movable automobile exception to the Fourth Amendment permits a police officer to stop an automobile and seize property or evidence without a warrant. Answer: True 96. In Katz v. United States, the Court ruled that bugging a public phone booth is unconstitutional. Answer: True 97. The right to a speedy and public trial is guaranteed by the Ninth Amendment. Answer: False 98. Miranda v. Arizona was overturned in 1994. Answer: False 99. The right to privacy is rooted in the Seventh Amendment. Answer: False 100. The Supreme Court ruled that the right of privacy protects the behavior of people in their bedrooms. Answer: True Essay Questions 101. Discuss the implications of the USA PATRIOT Act in terms of advocacy and criticism. Answer: The USA PATRIOT Act (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act) was enacted in response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The Act significantly expanded the authority of law enforcement agencies to surveil and investigate individuals suspected of terrorism or related crimes. It has had profound implications for advocacy and criticism, particularly in the areas of civil liberties, privacy rights, and government transparency. Advocacy: 1. Enhanced Security: Advocates argue that the Act has enhanced national security by providing law enforcement with necessary tools to prevent terrorist attacks. 2. Streamlined Investigations: Proponents believe that the Act has streamlined the investigative process, allowing for quicker action against potential threats. 3. Modernized Surveillance: Some argue that the Act has modernized surveillance capabilities, enabling law enforcement to keep pace with evolving technologies used by terrorists. Criticism: 1. Civil Liberties Concerns: Critics argue that the Act infringes on civil liberties and constitutional rights, particularly regarding surveillance, search and seizure, and due process. 2. Lack of Oversight: Some criticize the Act for lacking sufficient oversight mechanisms, potentially leading to abuses of power by law enforcement agencies. 3. Erosion of Privacy Rights: Critics contend that the Act has eroded privacy rights by allowing for the collection of vast amounts of personal data without adequate safeguards. In summary, the USA PATRIOT Act has been a subject of intense advocacy and criticism, with proponents emphasizing its role in enhancing national security and critics highlighting its potential negative impacts on civil liberties and privacy rights. The balance between security and civil liberties remains a central issue in the ongoing debate surrounding the Act. 102. Distinguish between civil liberties and civil rights. Answer: Civil liberties and civil rights are both essential components of a democratic society, but they refer to slightly different concepts. Civil liberties are freedoms guaranteed to individuals that protect them from government actions. These liberties are outlined in the Bill of Rights, the Constitution, and other laws. Examples of civil liberties include freedom of speech, religion, and the press, the right to privacy, and the right to a fair trial. Civil liberties are meant to protect individuals from government overreach and ensure that they can express themselves and live their lives without undue interference. Civil rights, on the other hand, are protections against discrimination based on certain characteristics. Civil rights ensure that individuals are treated equally and fairly under the law, regardless of their race, gender, religion, or other characteristics. Examples of civil rights include the right to vote, the right to equal access to public facilities, and the right to equal employment opportunities. Civil rights laws are designed to ensure that all individuals have the same opportunities and protections under the law. In summary, civil liberties protect individuals from government actions that could infringe on their freedoms, while civil rights protect individuals from discrimination and ensure equal treatment under the law. Both are crucial aspects of a democratic society that values individual rights and equality. 103. Discuss the emergence of civil liberties and civil rights in the United States. Answer: The emergence of civil liberties and civil rights in the United States has been a complex and ongoing process shaped by historical events, social movements, and legal developments. Here is an overview of the key moments and factors that have contributed to the development of civil liberties and civil rights in the U.S.: 1. Founding Documents: The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution laid the foundation for civil liberties in the United States. The Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the Constitution, explicitly protects individual freedoms such as freedom of speech, religion, and the press. 2. Abolitionist Movement: The abolitionist movement of the 19th century played a crucial role in the emergence of civil rights in the United States. Led by activists such as Frederick Douglass and Harriet Tubman, the movement fought to end slavery and secure equal rights for African Americans. 3. Civil War and Reconstruction: The Civil War and the Reconstruction era led to significant advancements in civil rights. The 13th Amendment abolished slavery, the 14th Amendment granted citizenship and equal protection under the law to all persons born or naturalized in the U.S., and the 15th Amendment granted African American men the right to vote. 4. Jim Crow Era: Despite these advancements, the Jim Crow era saw the implementation of segregation laws and widespread discrimination against African Americans. The civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s, led by figures such as Martin Luther King Jr. and Rosa Parks, challenged these injustices and sought to secure equal rights for all Americans. 5. Civil Rights Legislation: The civil rights movement culminated in several landmark pieces of legislation, including the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which outlawed discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin, and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which aimed to overcome legal barriers that prevented African Americans from voting. 6. Expansion of Civil Liberties: Over time, the concept of civil liberties has expanded to include protections for a broader range of rights, such as the right to privacy (established in cases like Roe v. Wade) and the rights of LGBTQ+ individuals (recognized in cases like Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized same-sex marriage). 7. Ongoing Challenges: Despite these advancements, challenges to civil liberties and civil rights persist in the United States. Issues such as racial profiling, voter suppression, and unequal access to education and healthcare continue to be major concerns. In conclusion, the emergence of civil liberties and civil rights in the United States has been a long and complex process marked by progress, setbacks, and ongoing struggles for equality and justice. These rights continue to evolve as society grapples with new challenges and strives to uphold the principles of freedom and equality for all. 104. Indicate how the case of Barron v. Baltimore affected states in terms of civil liberties. Answer: The case of Barron v. Baltimore (1833) had significant implications for states in terms of civil liberties by establishing a key precedent regarding the application of the Bill of Rights to the states. In Barron v. Baltimore, the Supreme Court ruled that the Bill of Rights, specifically the Fifth Amendment's provision regarding just compensation for private property taken for public use, applied only to the federal government and not to state governments. This decision was based on the understanding of the Bill of Rights as a limit on the powers of the federal government, not on the states. As a result of this ruling, states were not bound by the provisions of the Bill of Rights and were free to enact laws that might infringe on the rights protected by the Bill of Rights. This had the effect of limiting the scope of civil liberties protections at the state level and allowing states to regulate certain rights and freedoms without federal interference. However, it's important to note that the interpretation of the relationship between the Bill of Rights and the states has evolved over time. Subsequent Supreme Court decisions, particularly during the 20th century, have incorporated many of the provisions of the Bill of Rights into the concept of "substantive due process," which applies to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of equal protection and due process. This incorporation has expanded the protection of civil liberties at the state level, reducing the impact of the Barron v. Baltimore decision. 105. Indicate how the doctrine of incorporation affected the states in terms of civil liberties. Answer: The doctrine of incorporation, derived from the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause, applied the protections of the Bill of Rights to the states, ensuring that state governments could not infringe on certain fundamental liberties. This significantly impacted the states in terms of civil liberties by requiring them to adhere to the same constitutional standards as the federal government. Prior to incorporation, the Bill of Rights only restricted the federal government, allowing states to enact laws that might violate these rights. Incorporation changed this dynamic, making the Bill of Rights applicable to state laws and actions, thus expanding civil liberties protections nationwide. 106. What is the theory of selective incorporation and how is it used to increase the protection of civil liberties? Answer: Selective incorporation is a legal doctrine that applies the protections of the Bill of Rights to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. This doctrine allows the Supreme Court to determine which rights are fundamental and should be applied to the states, ensuring a baseline level of protection for individuals' civil liberties across the country. Selective incorporation increases the protection of civil liberties by ensuring that state governments cannot infringe on fundamental rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. It prevents states from enacting laws that violate these rights, ensuring that individuals have consistent protections regardless of where they live in the United States. This doctrine has been used by the Supreme Court to gradually apply more provisions of the Bill of Rights to the states, leading to a more uniform standard of civil liberties protections throughout the country. 107. Compare and contrast the establishment of religion with the free exercise of religion. Answer: The establishment of religion and the free exercise of religion are two distinct concepts related to the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. 1. Establishment of Religion: This concept, often referred to as the Establishment Clause, prohibits the government from establishing an official religion or giving preference to one religion over another. It ensures that the government remains neutral in matters of religion and does not promote or endorse any particular faith. This clause prevents the government from imposing a state-sponsored religion on its citizens and protects individuals from religious coercion by the state. 2. Free Exercise of Religion: This concept, known as the Free Exercise Clause, guarantees individuals the right to practice their religion without interference from the government. It allows individuals to worship as they choose, participate in religious ceremonies and rituals, and follow religious teachings and beliefs. This clause ensures that individuals can freely express and manifest their religious beliefs in both private and public settings. In summary, while the Establishment Clause prohibits the government from establishing or promoting a religion, the Free Exercise Clause protects individuals' rights to practice their religion freely. Together, these clauses ensure both religious freedom and the separation of church and state in the United States. 108. Comment on the Lemon test and how it is used in regard to the provision of state aid to churches. Answer: The Lemon test, derived from the 1971 Supreme Court case Lemon v. Kurtzman, is a three-pronged test used to determine whether a law or government action violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The test requires that a law or government action must: 1. Have a secular legislative purpose, 2. Have a primary effect that neither advances nor inhibits religion, and 3. Not result in excessive government entanglement with religion. In the context of providing state aid to churches or religious organizations, the Lemon test is often used to assess whether such aid is constitutional. For example, if a state provides financial assistance or resources to a church school, the Lemon test would be applied to determine if the aid violates the Establishment Clause. If the aid is found to have a secular purpose (such as promoting education) and does not primarily benefit or inhibit religion, it may pass the Lemon test. However, if the aid is seen as advancing religion or creating excessive entanglement between government and religion, it would likely be deemed unconstitutional. The Lemon test has been criticized for being overly broad and subjective, leading to inconsistent application by the courts. In recent years, some justices have suggested moving away from the Lemon test and instead focusing on whether the government action endorses or coerces religious activity, which is seen as a clearer standard. 109. How has the Supreme Court regulated and protected the right to free exercise of religion? Answer: The Supreme Court has played a crucial role in regulating and protecting the right to free exercise of religion through its interpretations of the First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause. Over time, the Court has developed a framework for analyzing cases involving free exercise rights and has issued decisions that have shaped the extent and limits of these rights. Some key ways in which the Supreme Court has regulated and protected the right to free exercise of religion include: 1. Sherbert Test: In Sherbert v. Verner (1963), the Court established a test to determine if a law substantially burdens an individual's free exercise of religion. Under this test, if a law imposes a substantial burden on a person's religious practices, the government must demonstrate a compelling interest justifying the burden and show that the law is the least restrictive means of achieving that interest. 2. Compelling Interest Test: Building on the Sherbert test, the Court further refined the standard in Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972) and Employment Division v. Smith (1990). In these cases, the Court held that laws burdening religious practices must serve a compelling government interest and must be narrowly tailored to achieve that interest. 3. Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA): In response to the Smith decision, Congress passed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act in 1993. RFRA reinstated the Sherbert test, requiring the government to show a compelling interest and use the least restrictive means in cases involving laws that substantially burden the free exercise of religion. 4. Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA): RLUIPA, passed in 2000, provides additional protections for religious exercise, particularly for prisoners and in land use regulations that may burden religious exercise. 5. Recent Decisions: In recent years, the Court has issued decisions that further clarify the boundaries of free exercise rights. For example, in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. (2014), the Court held that closely-held corporations could assert religious objections to certain health care mandates under RFRA. Overall, the Supreme Court has played a crucial role in defining and protecting the right to free exercise of religion, balancing individual religious freedoms with the government's interest in regulating conduct and maintaining order. 110. How has the Supreme Court’s protection of free speech preserved democracy? Answer: The Supreme Court's protection of free speech has played a vital role in preserving democracy in the United States by ensuring that individuals can freely express their opinions, criticize the government, and engage in public debate. Several key ways in which the Court's protection of free speech has preserved democracy include: 1. Encouraging Public Debate: By protecting the right to free speech, the Court has encouraged open and robust public debate on important issues. This debate is essential for a healthy democracy, as it allows citizens to exchange ideas, challenge prevailing viewpoints, and make informed decisions. 2. Protecting Minority Voices: Free speech protections ensure that minority viewpoints are not silenced or marginalized. This is crucial in a democracy, as it allows for the expression of diverse perspectives and prevents majority tyranny. 3. Promoting Political Participation: Free speech rights enable individuals to participate in the political process by expressing their opinions, supporting candidates, and advocating for policy changes. This participation is essential for democracy to function effectively. 4. Holding Government Accountable: Free speech protections allow for criticism of the government and public officials, holding them accountable for their actions and ensuring transparency in government operations. 5. Fostering Innovation and Progress: Free speech encourages the exchange of ideas and the sharing of knowledge, which can lead to innovation and progress in various fields. This intellectual freedom is essential for a dynamic and forward-thinking society. Overall, the Supreme Court's protection of free speech has been instrumental in preserving democracy by fostering open debate, protecting minority viewpoints, promoting political participation, holding government accountable, and fostering innovation and progress. 111. Indicate an understanding of the limitations placed on a person’s right to speak in the United States. Answer: In the United States, while the First Amendment protects freedom of speech, there are limitations and exceptions to this right. Some of the key limitations placed on a person's right to speak include: 1. Obscenity: Speech that is considered obscene, as defined by the Miller test, is not protected under the First Amendment. Obscenity is typically defined as material that appeals to prurient interest, is patently offensive, and lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. 2. Defamation: Defamatory speech, including libel (written defamation) and slander (spoken defamation), is not protected. Defamation involves making false statements of fact that harm someone's reputation. 3. Incitement to Violence: Speech that directly incites imminent lawless action and is likely to incite such action is not protected. This is known as the Brandenburg test, established in Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969). 4. True Threats: Speech that constitutes a true threat of violence against an individual or group is not protected. 5. Fighting Words: Speech that is likely to incite immediate physical retaliation or violence by the listener is not protected. However, the definition and application of "fighting words" have been narrowed over time by the courts. 6. Hate Speech: Generally, hate speech is protected under the First Amendment unless it falls into one of the above categories. However, some forms of hate speech may be restricted in certain contexts, such as in schools or in the workplace, if it creates a hostile environment. 7. Commercial Speech: While commercial speech is protected under the First Amendment, it is subject to greater regulation than other forms of speech. The government may regulate commercial speech that is false or misleading or promotes unlawful activity. It's important to note that these limitations are subject to interpretation by the courts and may evolve over time. Additionally, some restrictions on speech may vary depending on the context, such as in public versus private settings. 112. How has the Court’s interpretation of symbolic speech especially for public school students, affected democracy? Answer: The Supreme Court's interpretation of symbolic speech, particularly in the context of public school students, has had significant implications for democracy. Symbolic speech refers to actions or symbols that convey a particular message or expression, often without the use of words. Some key ways in which the Court's interpretation of symbolic speech has affected democracy include: 1. Protection of Student Expression: The Court has ruled that students have the right to engage in certain forms of symbolic speech, such as wearing armbands or expressing political opinions through clothing, as long as it does not disrupt the educational environment. This protection of student expression fosters a culture of civic engagement and encourages young people to participate in democracy. 2. Educational Environment: The Court has also recognized the need to balance students' free speech rights with the school's interest in maintaining an effective and orderly educational environment. This has led to decisions allowing schools to regulate speech that would cause substantial disruption or interfere with the rights of others. 3. Civic Education: By protecting students' right to engage in symbolic speech, the Court has contributed to civic education by allowing students to express their views, engage in political discourse, and learn about the importance of free expression in a democratic society. 4. Limitations on Expression: However, the Court has also upheld certain limitations on symbolic speech in schools, such as restrictions on speech that is lewd, vulgar, or promotes illegal drug use. These limitations are intended to maintain a safe and respectful learning environment. 5. Impact on Democracy: Overall, the Court's interpretation of symbolic speech for public school students has had a positive impact on democracy by encouraging political participation, fostering civic education, and balancing free speech rights with the need for order and safety in schools. 113. Differentiate between prior restraint and subsequent punishment as applied to freedom of the press in the United States. Answer: Prior restraint and subsequent punishment are two different concepts related to freedom of the press in the United States. 1. Prior Restraint: Prior restraint refers to government actions that prevent the publication or dissemination of speech before it occurs. This can include injunctions, censorship, or other forms of official control over what can be published. Prior restraint is generally considered to be unconstitutional in the United States under the First Amendment, as it places a direct restriction on free speech and the press. 2. Subsequent Punishment: Subsequent punishment, on the other hand, refers to actions taken against speech or publication after it has occurred. This can include legal actions such as fines, lawsuits for defamation or libel, or other forms of punishment for speech that is deemed unlawful or harmful. Subsequent punishment is subject to certain limitations under the First Amendment, such as the requirement that any restrictions on speech be narrowly tailored and serve a compelling government interest. In summary, prior restraint involves government actions to prevent speech before it occurs, while subsequent punishment involves legal actions taken against speech after it has occurred. The U.S. Constitution generally prohibits prior restraint but allows for subsequent punishment under certain circumstances. 114. Differentiate between libel and slander. In addition, comment on the effects of the Sullivan standard regarding the case that affected The New York Times. Answer: Libel and slander are both forms of defamation, which involve making false statements that harm someone's reputation. The main difference between libel and slander lies in the medium through which the defamatory statement is conveyed: 1. Libel: Libel is a written or published false statement that is damaging to a person's reputation. This can include statements published in newspapers, magazines, books, or online. 2. Slander: Slander is a spoken false statement that is damaging to a person's reputation. This can include statements made in conversation, speeches, or broadcast over the radio or television. Both libel and slander are civil wrongs, and a person who is defamed can sue the person who made the false statement for damages. The Sullivan standard, established by the Supreme Court in the case of New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964), has had a significant impact on defamation law in the United States. In this case, the Court held that in order for a public official to successfully sue for defamation, they must prove that the defamatory statement was made with "actual malice" – that is, with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard for its truth or falsity. The Sullivan standard has since been extended to apply to public figures as well, meaning that in order to successfully sue for defamation, a public figure must also prove actual malice. This standard provides greater protection for freedom of speech and the press, as it makes it more difficult for public officials and figures to sue for defamation and encourages robust debate and criticism of public officials and figures. 115. How has the Supreme Court expanded and restricted the Fourth Amendment’s search and seizure protections? Answer: The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects against unreasonable search and seizure by the government. Over the years, the Supreme Court has both expanded and restricted the scope of these protections through its interpretations of the amendment. Some key ways in which the Court has expanded and restricted the Fourth Amendment's search and seizure protections include: 1. Expansion through the Exclusionary Rule: In Weeks v. United States (1914), the Supreme Court established the exclusionary rule, which prohibits evidence obtained through illegal searches or seizures from being used in court. This rule serves to deter law enforcement officials from conducting unlawful searches and seizures. 2. Expansion to Include Automobiles: In Carroll v. United States (1925), the Court held that automobiles can be searched without a warrant if there is probable cause to believe that the vehicle contains contraband or evidence of a crime. This established the automobile exception to the warrant requirement. 3. Expansion to Include Expectation of Privacy: In Katz v. United States (1967), the Court ruled that the Fourth Amendment protects people, not just places, and that individuals have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their person, home, and effects. This expanded the scope of the Fourth Amendment to include electronic surveillance and other forms of monitoring. 4. Restrictions on Warrantless Searches: The Court has imposed restrictions on warrantless searches, requiring that searches generally be conducted pursuant to a valid warrant based on probable cause. However, there are several exceptions to this requirement, such as the exigent circumstances exception and the plain view doctrine. 5. Expansion to Include GPS Tracking: In United States v. Jones (2012), the Court held that the prolonged use of a GPS tracking device on a suspect's vehicle constitutes a search under the Fourth Amendment, requiring a warrant. 6. Restrictions on Searches Incident to Arrest: The Court has placed limits on searches incident to arrest, ruling that such searches must be limited in scope to the area within the arrestee's immediate control and that the police may not search a cell phone without a warrant. Overall, the Supreme Court's interpretations of the Fourth Amendment have both expanded and restricted the scope of search and seizure protections, balancing the need for effective law enforcement with the protection of individual privacy rights. 116. Discuss the crisis of freedom of the press in great Britain. Answer: Freedom of the press in Great Britain has faced several challenges and crises over the years, highlighting issues related to media regulation, government control, and threats to journalists' safety. Some key aspects of the crisis of freedom of the press in Great Britain include: 1. Media Regulation: The regulation of the press in Great Britain has been a contentious issue, with debates over the balance between freedom of expression and the need for responsible journalism. The Leveson Inquiry, established in 2011 in response to the News International phone hacking scandal, highlighted concerns about media ethics and the need for stronger regulation. 2. Government Control: There have been concerns about government attempts to control the press in Great Britain, including through the use of injunctions and other legal mechanisms to suppress reporting. Critics argue that such actions undermine freedom of the press and the public's right to know. 3. Threats to Journalists: Journalists in Great Britain have faced threats to their safety, including harassment, intimidation, and violence. The killing of journalist Lyra McKee in Northern Ireland in 2019 underscored the dangers faced by journalists working in the UK. 4. Impact of Brexit: The Brexit process has raised concerns about the impact on freedom of the press in Great Britain, particularly in relation to access to information and the potential erosion of press freedoms as the UK seeks to redefine its relationship with the EU. 5. Digital Challenges: The rise of digital media has presented challenges to traditional forms of journalism in Great Britain, raising questions about the future of independent journalism and the role of social media in shaping public discourse. Overall, while Great Britain has a long tradition of a free press, the country has faced a number of challenges and crises that have raised important questions about the state of press freedom and the role of journalism in a democratic society. 117. Indicate an understanding in a commentary about how the United States Supreme Court has reacted to obscenity. Answer: The United States Supreme Court has taken a nuanced approach to obscenity, recognizing that while the First Amendment protects freedom of speech, certain forms of expression, such as obscenity, are not protected. The Court's rulings on obscenity have evolved over time, reflecting changing societal norms and attitudes towards sexually explicit material. In the landmark case of Miller v. California (1973), the Supreme Court established a three-pronged test, known as the Miller test, to determine what constitutes obscene material that is not protected by the First Amendment. According to the Miller test, material is considered obscene if: 1. The average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the material appeals to prurient interests. 2. The material depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive way. 3. The material, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. This test replaced the previous standard set forth in the case of Roth v. United States (1957), which defined obscenity as material that was "utterly without redeeming social importance." Since Miller, the Supreme Court has upheld the use of the Miller test to determine obscenity in various contexts, including in the regulation of adult-oriented businesses and the distribution of sexually explicit material. However, the Court has also emphasized the importance of protecting free speech and has cautioned against overly broad interpretations of obscenity laws that could infringe on First Amendment rights. Overall, the Supreme Court's approach to obscenity reflects a careful balancing of competing interests, seeking to protect freedom of expression while also recognizing society's interest in regulating certain types of sexually explicit material. 118. Discuss the rights of individuals who come into contact on an adversarial basis with the criminal justice system in terms of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments. Answer: The Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments to the United States Constitution provide important protections for individuals who come into contact with the criminal justice system on an adversarial basis, ensuring that their rights are upheld during the investigation, arrest, trial, and sentencing processes. 1. Fourth Amendment: The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. This means that law enforcement officers must have a warrant supported by probable cause in order to search a person's home, property, or belongings. It also protects individuals from being detained without reasonable suspicion. 2. Fifth Amendment: The Fifth Amendment provides several important protections for individuals accused of crimes. It guarantees the right to due process of law, which includes the right to a fair and impartial trial. The Fifth Amendment also protects against self-incrimination, meaning that individuals cannot be forced to testify against themselves. This protection is often invoked through the right to remain silent. 3. Sixth Amendment: The Sixth Amendment guarantees several rights for individuals accused of crimes, including the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury. It also guarantees the right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation, the right to confront witnesses, and the right to have the assistance of counsel for their defense. Together, these amendments provide a framework of protections designed to ensure that individuals who come into contact with the criminal justice system are treated fairly and have their rights respected. These protections are critical for preserving the integrity of the criminal justice system and ensuring that individuals are not unfairly deprived of their liberty. 119. How has the Supreme Court balanced the Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights? Answer: The Supreme Court has balanced the Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights of individuals in criminal cases through a series of decisions that have clarified the scope of these rights and the circumstances under which they apply. 1. Right to Counsel: The Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to counsel for defendants in criminal cases. In Gideon v. Wainwright (1963), the Supreme Court held that this right applies to state court proceedings as well as federal court proceedings. This decision ensured that individuals who cannot afford an attorney are provided with legal representation. 2. Right to a Fair Trial: The Fifth and Sixth Amendments guarantee the right to a fair trial, which includes the right to an impartial jury and the right to confront witnesses. In cases such as Crawford v. Washington (2004) and Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts (2009), the Supreme Court clarified the scope of these rights, holding that defendants have the right to cross-examine witnesses and confront the evidence against them. 3. Right Against Self-Incrimination: The Fifth Amendment protects individuals from being compelled to incriminate themselves. This right is often invoked through the right to remain silent. In Miranda v. Arizona (1966), the Supreme Court held that individuals must be informed of their rights, including the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney, before being interrogated by law enforcement. 4. Balancing Test: In balancing the Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights, the Supreme Court has often used a balancing test to determine whether a particular action by the government violates these rights. This test weighs the government's interest in obtaining evidence or conducting a trial against the individual's rights to counsel, a fair trial, and protection against self-incrimination. Overall, the Supreme Court has sought to strike a balance between the government's interest in prosecuting crimes and the rights of individuals accused of crimes, ensuring that defendants are treated fairly and their constitutional rights are protected. 120. How has the Supreme Court interpreted the cruel and unusual punishment clause of the eighth amendment as it applies to the death penalty? Answer: The Supreme Court has interpreted the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment in the context of the death penalty in several key cases, shaping the way capital punishment is carried out in the United States. Some of the most significant rulings include: 1. Furman v. Georgia (1972): In this landmark case, the Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty as applied at the time was unconstitutional because it was arbitrarily and capriciously imposed. This decision effectively halted executions in the United States until states could revise their death penalty laws to address the Court's concerns. 2. Gregg v. Georgia (1976): In a series of cases collectively known as the Gregg decision, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the death penalty, finding that it was not inherently cruel and unusual punishment. However, the Court held that certain safeguards must be in place to ensure that the death penalty is not imposed arbitrarily, including the requirement for bifurcated trials (separate guilt and sentencing phases) and the consideration of mitigating factors. 3. Atkins v. Virginia (2002): The Supreme Court ruled that the execution of individuals with intellectual disabilities violates the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. This decision prohibits states from executing individuals whose intellectual functioning falls below a certain threshold. 4. Roper v. Simmons (2005): The Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty for individuals who were under the age of 18 at the time of their crimes is unconstitutional. This decision extended the Court's previous ruling in Stanford v. Kentucky (1989), which upheld the constitutionality of the death penalty for offenders aged 16 and 17. 5. Hall v. Florida (2014): The Supreme Court ruled that Florida's method for determining intellectual disability in death penalty cases was unconstitutional because it relied on a fixed IQ cutoff without considering the standard error of measurement. This decision clarified the standards for determining intellectual disability in death penalty cases. Overall, the Supreme Court's interpretations of the Eighth Amendment as it applies to the death penalty have sought to ensure that capital punishment is not applied in an arbitrary or discriminatory manner and that certain categories of individuals, such as those with intellectual disabilities or juveniles, are exempt from the death penalty. Test Bank for Approaching Democracy Larry A Berman, Bruce Allen Murphy 9780205903825
Download
Close
Close
