Deck 4: The Constitution: Focus on Application to Business

Question 1

The Necessary and Proper Clause concerns the specific steps Congress must take to pass needed laws under the Constitution.

Answer 1

False

Question 2

The first ten amendments to the Constitution are the Bill of Rights.

Answer 2

True

Question 3

It was not until the 1930s that the Supreme Court held the states could not interfere with federal regulation of business.

Answer 3

False

Question 4

The Commerce Clause requires Congress and the states to share the power to regulate trade with foreign nations.

Question 5

The Commerce Clause, in practice, has a small effect on the operation of business in the United States.

Question 6

The Supreme Court has never reversed itself on a major constitutional issue.

Question 7

Amendments to the Constitution become effective when approved by two-thirds of the House and the Senate and signed by the President.

Question 8

In McCulloch v. Maryland, the Supreme Court held that the Congress did not have the constitutional power necessary to charter a bank; that was a function reserved to the states.

Question 9

As required by Article III of the Constitution, the Supreme Court has the primary role in amending the Constitution.

Question 10

In McCulloch v. Maryland the Supreme Court held that federal government actions are "supreme" over actions taken by state governments.

Question 11

"Commerce among the states" means interstate commerce.

Question 12

In McCulloch v. Maryland the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of a bank chartered by Congress.

Question 13

The Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution after it had been adopted.

Question 14

In Gibbons v. Ogden, the Supreme Court held that commerce among the states means interstate commerce.

Question 15

The Supreme Court struck down a tax imposed by Maryland on a national bank because the tax violated the Supremacy Clause.

Question 16

Amendments to the Constitution must be initiated by the Senate then approved by the President and the Supreme Court.

Question 17

The Commerce Clause requires Congress and the states to share the power to regulate domestic business.

Question 18

To become effective, the original Constitution had to be adopted by at least one half of the original states of the union.

Question 19

The way the Constitution is interpreted has changed over time.

Question 20

The Necessary and Proper Clause states that the Supreme Court is to ensure that statutes passed by Congress are "necessary and proper" under the Constitution.

Question 21

Illinois passes a law requiring all restaurants in the state to buy 5% of all foods they use from Illinois food companies. This does not violate the commerce clause.

Question 22

The Supreme Court strikes down state laws that are found to restrict interstate commerce.

Question 23

If Congress passes a regulation, a state is allowed to eliminate parts of the federal rule that injure businesses in that state.

Question 24

The Supreme Court defines the term "interstate," as used in connection with the Commerce Clause, narrowly.

Question 25

States may not adopt regulations that are stricter than regulations adopted by Congress.

Question 26

In Katzenback v. McClung, concerning race discrimination at a restaurant, the Court held that the Constitution allows federal regulation of even local businesses.

Question 27

A state may not regulate public safety without permission of Congress.

Question 28

Congress and the states may share regulatory responsibilities.

Question 29

In Wickard v. Filburn the Supreme Court held that Congress has the constitutional authority to regulate agricultural production even if the output is not sold into commerce.

Question 30

In general, the Supreme Court holds it constitutional for Congress to regulate most every aspect of business.

Question 31

Congress passes a law banning racial discrimination at restaurants. One located in a small town does not want to serve African-Americans. The discrimination law will not apply because the business is not in interstate commerce.

Question 32

In Wickard v. Filburn, the Supreme Court held that if a farmer only produced wheat to be used on that farmer's property then there is no commerce to be regulated by Congress.

Question 33

The states may insist Congress allow them to share regulatory responsibilities.

Question 34

In Katzenback v. McClung, concerning race discrimination at a restaurant, the Court held that the Constitution does not allow federal regulation of purely local businesses, even if the goal is socially desirable.

Question 35

A state may not regulate the airline industry, even if flights come into the state, because Congress has chosen to regulate the industry.

Question 36

If a state bans the sale of milk that is not produced by cows in the state, the ban will probably be upheld as constitutional because it helps ensure the freshness of milk.

Question 37

Arizona passed a law requiring trains passing through the state to be shortened for safety purposes. The Supreme Court struck down the state rule as unconstitutional.

Question 38

A state may charge higher fees for disposal of hazardous wastes if the wastes are generated outside the state than for hazardous wastes that are generated in-state.

Question 39

If a state regulates a business and later Congress imposes its own regulations, under the Tenth Amendment, the existing state rules may not be replaced by federal rules adopted later.

Question 40

If a person produces a product locally and sells the product locally, federal regulation of the product would not apply since there is only intrastate commerce.

Question 41

The states do not have the power to limit federal taxes on property owned by citizens in their own states.

Question 42

In Hughes v. Oklahoma, a statute passed by Oklahoma prohibiting the export of minnows out of the state, to help protect the specie, was held to be constitutional.

Question 43

Tax laws passed by Congress may not be "discriminatory" in impact according to the Supreme Court.

Question 44

Congress may not impose regulations on a particular industry that have a primary impact in one state.

Question 45

A state may regulate public health without permission of Congress.

Question 46

The Supreme Court in Hughes v. Oklahoma held that states have compelling interests in protecting natural resources and these interests supersede the Commerce Clause.

Question 47

The Supreme Court in Hughes v. Oklahoma held that the state was unconstitutionally discriminating in interstate trade.

Question 48

The Supreme Court has held that Congress may pass taxes so long as they do not interfere with interstate commerce.

Question 49

States may impose taxes on goods imported from other countries so long as the tax rate is the same as that imposed on businesses within the state.

Question 50

The Supreme Court in Hughes v. Oklahoma held that when states have legitimate interests in regulating an area the regulations imposed must impose as small a burden as possible on interstate commerce, given the alternatives.

Question 51

If Congress passes a law regulating business in a certain manner, states may then pass laws that duplicate the effect of the regulation.

Question 52

The Supreme Court has held that taxes may not have a "crushing effect on businesses."

Question 53

Congress passes a law requiring cocaine dealers to report income from cocaine so it may be taxed. If they report the income, they will be prosecuted for drug dealing. Because of the self-incrimination, taxes from illegal sources may not be taxed.

Question 54

If, to help the development of small businesses, a state legislature imposes a lower tax rate on goods produced by small businesses in the state than it imposes on goods produced by similar businesses from other states, the tax is unconstitutional.

Question 55

If the federal government creates regulations over certain business practices, states may not imitate those regulations if state rules, like the federal rules, will limit interstate commerce.

Question 56

The Supreme Court in Hughes v. Oklahoma held that when states have a "compelling interests" in regulating an area, such as environmental protection, that interest supersedes the Commerce Clause.

Question 57

The Supreme Court in Hughes v. Oklahoma held that when states have legitimate interests in regulating an area, such as environmental protection, the regulations imposed must have only "incidental" effects on interstate commerce.

Question 58

States may impose sales taxes on items shipped to state residents from out-of-state mail order businesses.

Question 59

Tax laws passed by Congress may be "crushing" in impact on business, according to the Supreme Court, and still be constitutional.

Question 60

In Northwest States Portland Cement Co. v. Minnesota, the Supreme Court held that states may impose specific taxes on persons "passing through the state," if they are in the state for business purposes, not recreation.

Question 61

A state law prohibiting anonymous communications on the internet (such as sending spam from unidentified sources) was stricken as a violation of the First Amendment.

Question 62

In Ward v. Rock Against Racism, the Supreme Court held that freedom of speech means local governments cannot control the volume at which people listen to music in public.

Question 63

In Consolidated Edison Co. v. Public Service Comm., the Supreme Court held that state utility regulators could impose restrictions on the time, place or manner in which political speech was delivered so long as the restriction was "reasonable."

Question 64

A federal law restricting pornography on the internet was stricken by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional for being too sweeping in its coverage.

Question 65

The Supreme Court has gradually moved more and more to restrict political speech by commercial interests.

Question 66

In Consolidated Edison Co. v. Public Service Comm., the Supreme Court held that state utility regulators could prohibit all expenditures by a business spent for political purposes only because the business is "highly regulated."

Question 67

In Japan Line, Ltd. v. County of Los Angeles, the Supreme Court held that is was constitutional for California to tax foreign commerce, so long as the tax was correctly apportioned.

Question 68

Because the First Amendment says that "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech" the Supreme Court has held that no statutes may limit speech.

Question 69

The Constitution specifies that political speech is due more protection than is commercial or business speech.

Question 70

Freedom of the press is much more restricted in Europe than it is in the U.S.; reporters who are critical of government may face prosecution.

Question 71

If a business is interstate, the states may not tax the portion of a business generated within one state, unless so allowed by Congress.

Question 72

In Citizens United the Supreme Court upheld the McCain-Feingold Act that placed strict limits on campaign spending soon before an election.

Question 73

In Consolidated Edison Co. v. Public Service Comm., the Supreme Court held that state utility regulators could impose a restriction on political speech by a business so long as it was narrowly crafted to help achieve a "compelling state interest."

Question 74

Casino gambling is legal in Nevada but illegal in Texas, so Texas could ban the advertising of Nevada gambling in the Texas market.

Question 75

The Supreme Court has held that freedom of speech under the First Amendment does not apply to commercial speech, such as advertising by business.

Question 76

The Supreme Court is likely to strike down state laws that prohibit corporations from making any contributions to support or oppose political issues in the state.

Question 77

In Consolidated Edison Co. v. Public Service Comm., the Supreme Court held that state utility regulators could prevent the electric company from spending money to advertise the desirability of nuclear power.

Question 78

States may tax the portion of an interstate business that is produced within its borders.

Question 79

In Japan Line, Ltd. v. County of Los Angeles, the Supreme Court held that is was unconstitutional for the state of California to tax property owned by a Japanese company that was located in California that was used in international shipping.

Question 80

Many restrictions on advertising have been held to violate both the Constitution and the antitrust laws.