Question 1

Adam moved into an apartment complex.The rules of the complex prohibit unmarried men and women from living together in the same apartment.When Adam's friend,Diane,moved into the apartment he was served with eviction papers.Adam claims the apartment complex is violating his constitutional rights since it allows married couples to live together.Is Adam right?

Accepted Answer

The answer of Adam moved into an apartment complex.The rules...

Question 2

Smalltown,located in a border state,seemed to favor Caucasians over Latinos in its hiring practices.The courts will review the practice using

Accepted Answer

Strict scrutiny is applied when a law or practice is challenged that is based on a suspect classification, such as race or ethnicity. In this case, the practice of favoring Caucasians over Latinos in hiring suggests a potential violation of the Equal Protection Clause, which warrants strict scrutiny.

Question 3

Generally,constitutional protections do NOT apply to

Accepted Answer

Constitutional protections apply only to actions taken by the government, not private individuals or businesses.

Question 4

The idea that courts should not be heavily involved in lawmaking,but rather should only rule in cases where the constitutionality is clear is known as

Accepted Answer

The term "judicial restraint" refers to the idea that courts should limit their role in lawmaking and only make decisions in cases where the constitutionality is clear. This approach is seen as a more conservative interpretation of the role of the judiciary, and is often contrasted with "judicial activism," which involves a more expansive role for the courts in shaping policy and interpreting the Constitution.

Question 5

Ikerd was entering the United States from a trip abroad when the Customs Service confiscated some goods she had purchased and brought back with her.The determination of whether the government is attempting to take property and what type of hearing the Customs Service must offer Ikerd is an analysis of

Accepted Answer

This scenario deals with the process that the government must follow when confiscating property from an individual, so it is a matter of procedural due process. The Takings Clause and eminent domain are related to the government taking property for public use with just compensation, which is not exactly the case in this scenario. Substantive due process deals with the fundamental rights of individuals being protected by the law, but it is not the primary issue at hand in this scenario.

Question 6

The doctrine of preemption is based on the Constitution's

Accepted Answer

The doctrine of preemption is based on the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, which establishes that federal law is the supreme law of the land and overrides conflicting state laws. This principle allows the federal government to preempt, or override, state laws on specific issues, such as immigration, national security, and environmental regulation.

Question 7

A government action interfering with a fundamental right will be judged using

Accepted Answer

When a government action interferes with a fundamental right, the court will use strict scrutiny to determine whether the action is constitutional. This means that the government must have a compelling interest for the action and that the action must be narrowly tailored to achieve that interest.

Question 8

The "dormant" aspect of the Commerce Clause

Accepted Answer

The "dormant" aspect of the Commerce Clause is also known as the "negative" aspect because it prohibits states from interfering with "commercial intercourse" among themselves or with foreign nations. This means that even if Congress has not enacted legislation regulating a particular area of interstate commerce, the states cannot regulate in a way that would hinder such commerce.

Question 9

Judicial review can best be described as the power of federal courts to

Accepted Answer

Judicial review is the power of the federal courts to declare a statute or governmental action unconstitutional and void. This means that the courts can invalidate laws or government actions that they deem to be in violation of the Constitution. This power was established in the landmark case Marbury v. Madison in 1803, and it is considered to be one of the core principles of American constitutional law.

Question 10

The issue of the constitutional protections afforded flag burning was addressed in

Accepted Answer

Texas v. Johnson was a landmark Supreme Court case that held that burning the American flag is a form of symbolic speech protected under the First Amendment. This ruling established that the act of flag burning is a form of political expression and therefore falls under the protection of the First Amendment.

Question 11

Which of the following limitations does NOT apply to the government in civil proceedings to take a person's liberty or property?

Accepted Answer

The Equal Protection Clause applies to government actions that treat different groups of people unequally, but it is not directly related to civil proceedings to take a person's liberty or property. The other three limitations - Procedural Due Process, the Takings Clause, and Substantive Due Process - are all key constitutional protections that limit the government's power in these situations.

Question 12

Nevada passed a law banning all commercial billboards along state highways to improve the appearance of the environment.If this law were to be challenged,which of the following would a court examine to determine if the law is constitutional?

Accepted Answer

To determine if the law is constitutional, a court would examine all of the options listed. The law must both further the state's interest in creating a more aesthetically pleasing environment and directly and materially advance that goal. Additionally, the law must be narrowly tailored and not reach further than necessary to promote that goal. Therefore, all of the options are important factors in determining the constitutionality of the law.

Question 13

Lori and her friends burn an American flag as an act of political protest.Lori is arrested for violating a state law that prohibits flag burning.The Supreme Court has ruled that laws making it illegal to burn an American flag

Accepted Answer

The Supreme Court has ruled that laws making it illegal to burn an American flag are void because they violate a person's right to freedom of speech, which is protected under the First Amendment of the US Constitution. Therefore, Lori cannot be prosecuted for burning the American flag as an act of political protest.

Question 14

When Congress passed a criminal statute called the "Gun-Free School Zones Act," the Supreme Court ruled that

Accepted Answer

The Supreme Court ruled that the Gun-Free School Zones Act exceeded Congress's power under the Commerce Clause, making the law invalid. This decision was made in the case United States v. Lopez in 1995.

Question 15

If Oregon passed a statute that prohibited liquor stores from engaging in any kind of advertising,that statute would be

Accepted Answer

Prohibiting liquor stores from advertising would be a restriction on commercial speech, which is still protected by the First Amendment. While it is true that states can regulate alcohol sales in order to prevent minors from obtaining it, a complete ban on advertising would not be the most reasonable way to achieve that goal. Additionally, it would likely violate the Commerce Clause by discriminating against out-of-state businesses that may not be subject to the same advertising restrictions. The best answer is D, invalid as an unreasonable restriction of free speech.

Question 16

The Supreme Court's approach during the period from the 1950s through the 1970s in deciding cases on constitutional grounds is described as

Accepted Answer

The Supreme Court during this period was actively using its power of judicial review to strike down laws that violated constitutional principles, such as the separate-but-equal doctrine in Brown v. Board of Education. This approach is commonly referred to as "judicial activism."

Question 17

A form of due process that holds that certain rights are so fundamental that the government may not eliminate them is referred to as

Accepted Answer

Substantive due process holds that certain rights are so fundamental that the government may not eliminate them, even if it follows proper procedures. This includes rights such as the right to privacy, freedom of speech, and the right to own property.

Question 18

A woman wishes to attend an all-male,publicly supported college.She claims the college is violating the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution.What level of scrutiny will the court use when deciding this case?

Accepted Answer

When gender is at issue, the court will apply intermediate scrutiny. This means the government must show that the challenged classification is substantially related to an important governmental objective.

Question 19

Thompson raised 80 acres of corn,most of which he used to feed his own cattle.He locally sold what he did not use.Based on the Supreme Court's ruling in Wickard v.Filburn,

Accepted Answer

The Supreme Court's ruling in Wickard v. Filburn established that Congress may regulate any activity, even if it is entirely local, if it has a substantial economic effect on interstate commerce. In this case, Thompson's farming activity, although primarily local, still involves selling some of his corn locally, which can have an impact on the larger interstate market for corn. Therefore, Congress may regulate his farming activity under the Commerce Clause. Options A, C, and D are incorrect based on this ruling.

Question 20

The states have a severely restricted power to enact laws that affect interstate commerce.This concept is called

Accepted Answer

The concept described in the question is known as the dormant aspect of the Commerce Clause, which limits the states' authority to regulate or control interstate commerce. This means that states cannot pass laws that unduly burden or discriminate against interstate commerce, and that they must defer to federal authority in matters of interstate commerce regulation. The other choices are not directly related to this concept, although federalism is a closely related principle that concerns the division of power between federal and state governments.

Quiz 5: Constitutional Law