Question 1

Bill of Rights&#10;&#10;-Which of the following is not an interpretation of the Second Amendment given by serious constitutional scholars?&#10;A)The Second Amendment grants all law-abiding citizens the right to own guns.&#10;B)The Second Amendment grants states the right to have militias.&#10;C)The Second Amendment denies anyone except federal government employees the right to possess weapons.&#10;D)The Second Amendment grants individuals the right to own any military hardware that could be used to fend off an invasion.&#10;E)The Second Amendment grants citizens who are members of a state militia the right to own weapons.

Accepted Answer

About the only thing everyone agrees on in interpreting the Second Amendment is that it grants someone besides federal officials the right to have weapons. However, all of the other choices are legitimate interpretations of the Second Amendment when you look at the actual words used and understand the context in which it was written. Current Supreme Court interpretation is that law-abiding citizens can own non-automated weapons if registered through the government.

Question 2

Bill of Rights&#10;&#10;-If the FBI barged into your home to seize all of your bank records without a court warrant, that would violate the------ Amendment.&#10;A)First&#10;B)Third&#10;C)Fourth&#10;D)Fifth&#10;E)Seventh

Accepted Answer

The Fourth Amendment protects citizens from "unreasonable searches and seizures" without a court-ordered warrant. This right, however, is not absolute. For example, your college dorm room is not protected and can be searched with permission from the school. Also, if a police officer sees something illegal "in plain sight," then the officer can confiscate that item and search the rest of your home for more illegal items.

Question 3

Bill of Rights&#10;&#10;-What is the clear and present danger test?&#10;A)A movie starring Harrison Ford.&#10;B)A way to distinguish between advocacy and incitement with respect to speech.&#10;C)The criterion that must be met before engaging in war.&#10;D)The grounds under which someone may defend themselves with deadly force.&#10;E)The FDA procedure for measuring appropriate levels of bacteria in drinking water.

Accepted Answer

The clear and present danger test was established by the Supreme Court in Schenck v. United States (1919) to distinguish between speech that is protected by the First Amendment and speech that is not. The Court ruled that your right to free speech did not extend to inciting violence or public discord. An often-cited example is that you do not have the right to yell, "FIRE!!" in a crowded theater because it could cause harm to individuals.

Question 4

Bill of Rights&#10;&#10;-What is prior restraint?&#10;A)When the government tries to restrain someone with a mental illness from buying a gun.&#10;B)When municipalities are zoned so that certain groups are not allowed to live or build in certain areas.&#10;C)When the government tries to prevent the media from reporting on a story they want to keep secret.&#10;D)When children are prevented from entering dangerous areas for their protection.&#10;E)When Congress preemptively pulls a bill before the president can veto it.

Accepted Answer

Prior restraint occurs when the government tries to prevent the media from reporting on a story they want to keep secret. The Supreme Court in Near v. Minnesota (1931) decided that governments could not prevent newspapers from printing stories, or exercising prior restraint. In the United States, the freedom of the press is nearly unlimited. The government cannot even prevent you from reporting on classified government information. They can send you to jail after you report on it, but they can't prevent you from doing so in the first place.

Deck 8: CLEP: US Government