Question 1

The First Amendment states that Congress shall make no law prohibiting the "free exercise" of religion.It may,however,

Accepted Answer

Although Congress cannot prohibit the free exercise of religion, it can still make laws that apply to everyone, including religious individuals. This means that religious people must follow laws that apply to everyone else, such as laws against murder or theft. However, Congress cannot create laws that specifically target or burden a particular religion.

Question 2

The Supreme Court's current definition of obscenity denies free-speech protection to materials or activities that

Accepted Answer

The Supreme Court's current definition of obscenity is based on the Miller test, which states that materials or activities are not protected by the First Amendment if they lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. This means that materials that are purely pornographic in nature, without any redeeming value, can be considered obscene and may be subject to censorship or prosecution. Choices A and B may be factors in determining obscenity, but they are not the sole criteria. Choice D is based on the clear and present danger test, which is a separate legal standard for restricting speech. Choice E is also not the only criterion for obscenity according to current Supreme Court precedent.

Question 3

If you,as a public figure,are grievously harmed by the written statements of someone who cannot prove that they are true,you

Accepted Answer

The answer of  If you,as a public figure,are grievously harmed...

Question 4

Written defamation of character is known as

Accepted Answer

Written defamation of character is known as libel. Slander, on the other hand, is oral defamation of character. Obscenity refers to offensive material, while incitement refers to encouraging or provoking illegal actions. Political falsehood is a vague term that could refer to many things.

Question 5

The Supreme Court denied the Hazelwood High School student newspaper the right to print certain stories,using the argument that

Accepted Answer

The Supreme Court's decision in Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988) was based on the argument that schools have a legitimate interest in regulating the content of school-sponsored student publications in order to ensure that they are consistent with the educational mission of the school. The Court held that the First Amendment does not require schools to affirmatively promote or guarantee free speech rights for students in this context, and that school officials may restrict speech that is inconsistent with the school's educational goals. This decision has been criticized by some free speech advocates as overly restrictive, but it remains the law of the land.

Question 6

The "clear and present danger" test emerged in the Supreme Court's decision in the case of

Accepted Answer

The "clear and present danger" test emerged in the Supreme Court's decision in the case of Schenck v. United States. The test established that the government can limit free speech if the speech poses a "clear and present danger" to national security or public safety.

Question 7

The right of free expression,although not absolute,enjoys a higher status than the other rights granted by the U.S.Constitution.This is known as the doctrine of

Accepted Answer

The statement describes the concept of the preferred position doctrine, which holds that the right to free speech and expression is given a higher priority and protection than other constitutional rights. This doctrine is based on the belief that speech and expression are essential to the functioning of a democratic society, and should only be restricted in cases of compelling governmental interest.

Question 8

Military draft laws exempted "conscientious objectors" from military service.The Supreme Court ruled that conscientious objectors are individuals who

Accepted Answer

Conscientious objectors are individuals who hold deeply held moral, ethical, or religious beliefs that prevent them from participating in war or military service. The exemption from military service is based on the individual's sincerity of beliefs, not on any affiliation with a specific religion or religious denomination. Therefore, choices A, B, C, and E are incorrect.

Question 9

Slander differs from libel in that it refers to

Accepted Answer

Slander refers to spoken statements, while libel refers to written or published statements.

Question 10

The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of flag burning in the case of

Accepted Answer

Texas v. Johnson was a landmark Supreme Court case in 1989 in which the Court held, by a 5-4 majority, that burning the American flag was a form of symbolic speech protected by the First Amendment. The decision invalidated laws in 48 states and the District of Columbia that prohibited flag burning, making it a protected form of free speech.

Question 11

Benjamin Gitlow's case was significant because it resulted in the Supreme Court's declaring that

Accepted Answer

Benjamin Gitlow's case was significant because it resulted in the Supreme Court's declaring that freedom of speech and freedom of the press were "fundamental." This decision helped establish the principle that these rights are protected by the First Amendment and cannot be abridged by state or federal laws. While the case did not declare all sedition laws unconstitutional, it helped lay the groundwork for further rulings that limited the government's ability to suppress dissent.

Question 12

Justice Potter Stewart's oft-quoted dictum on hard-core as opposed to soft-core pornography was

Accepted Answer

Justice Potter Stewart famously used the phrase "I know it when I see it" during a 1964 Supreme Court case on obscenity regarding whether a particular film was pornographic. The phrase has since been used more broadly to refer to the difficulty in defining or classifying certain things that may be subjective or context-dependent.

Question 13

A local statute forbidding adult movie theaters from being located near churches,schools,or parks would probably be

Accepted Answer

The statute would be upheld as a regulation of land use. This is because the government has the power to regulate land use through zoning laws, and it is within their right to restrict certain businesses from being located near sensitive areas such as churches, schools, or parks. This is not a restriction on free expression as the theaters are still allowed to exist, just in a different location.

Question 14

If you,as a private individual,are grievously harmed by the statements of someone who can also prove that the statements are true,you

Accepted Answer

Even if the statements are true, a private individual cannot collect damages from the person who made the statements. Truth is an absolute defense against a claim of libel or slander, but it does not entitle someone to compensation for harm caused by the disclosure of that truth. However, if the person making the statements acted with malice, then there may be grounds for a defamation claim, regardless of whether the statements are true or not.

Question 15

When the Supreme Court rules that Amish people cannot be forced to send their children to public school beyond eighth grade,it

Accepted Answer

The ruling protects the Amish community's right to practice their religion freely by exempting them from compulsory education laws that conflict with their beliefs. However, it may be criticized for appearing to favor a particular religious practice, thus raising questions about the establishment clause.

Question 16

Why has the Supreme Court upheld the government's banning the burning of draft cards but declared unconstitutional a law banning the burning of the American flag?

Accepted Answer

The Supreme Court upheld the government's ban on burning draft cards because it believed the government had a right to protect draft cards as they were essential to running a draft. However, the Court declared unconstitutional a law banning the burning of the American flag because it viewed flag burning as a form of political speech that was protected under the First Amendment. The Constitution does not have an amendment that specifically protects draft cards, but the government's ability to run a draft is considered a compelling governmental interest that outweighs the restriction on speech. On the other hand, the First Amendment protects political speech, even if it is unpopular or offensive. The American flag is a national symbol, but this alone does not justify restricting speech.

Question 17

In the __________ case,the Supreme Court ruled that the part of the McCain-Feingold law that denied corporations and labor unions the right to run ads violated their rights to free speech under the Constitution.

Accepted Answer

The Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission case is the one in which the Supreme Court ruled that the part of the McCain-Feingold law that denied corporations and labor unions the right to run ads violated their rights to free speech under the Constitution.

Question 18

When Clarence Brandenburg was arrested for making a speech calling for "revengeance" against non-whites,the Supreme Court overturned his conviction by arguing that the government can only restrict speech when it

Accepted Answer

The Supreme Court overturned Clarence Brandenburg's conviction by arguing that the government can only restrict speech when it incites an "imminent" lawless action. This is known as the Brandenburg test, which determines when speech can be deemed as unprotected under the First Amendment. The government cannot punish speech that advocates for violent or illegal action unless that action is imminent or likely to occur.

Question 19

When U.S.Nazis sought to parade in Skokie,Illinois,where many Jews lived,the courts

Accepted Answer

The courts upheld the Nazis' right to parade peacefully, citing the First Amendment's protection of free speech. While many residents of Skokie were understandably upset by the planned parade, the courts held that the government could not restrict speech simply because it was offensive or unpopular.

Question 20

Writing for the Supreme Court,Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes proclaimed that the Congress could punish dangerous speech when that speech

Accepted Answer

Justice Holmes' famous "clear and present danger" test, established in the landmark case Schenck v. United States (1919), held that speech could be punished if it presented a clear and present danger to the United States, such as inciting violent action or posing a threat to national security. This ruling established a precedent for the government's ability to restrict certain kinds of dangerous speech.

Quiz 5: Civil Liberties Civil Liberties