Chapter 4: Civil Liberties And Public Policy
AP US Government
- 1.
Civil liberties are legal and constitutional protections against
- A.
Criminals
- B.
Government
- C.
Foreign invasions
- D.
Private enterprise
Correct Answer
B. GovernmentExplanation
Civil liberties are legal and constitutional protections that safeguard individuals from potential abuses and encroachments by the government. These rights ensure that citizens have certain freedoms and protections, such as freedom of speech, religion, and assembly, as well as protection against unlawful searches and seizures. Civil liberties serve as a check on the power of the government, ensuring that it does not infringe upon the rights and freedoms of its citizens.Rate this question:
-
- 2.
Civil liberties are formally set down in the
- A.
Bill of Rights
- B.
Preamble to the Constitution
- C.
Declaration of Independence
- D.
Articles of Confederation
Correct Answer
A. Bill of RightsExplanation
The correct answer is the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights is a formal document that outlines the civil liberties and rights of individuals. It was added to the United States Constitution in 1791, guaranteeing certain fundamental freedoms such as freedom of speech, religion, and the right to a fair trial. It serves as a protection against government infringement on individual rights and has been a cornerstone of American democracy.Rate this question:
-
- 3.
Most cases concerning civil liberties are easy and straight forward
- A.
True
- B.
False
Correct Answer
B. FalseExplanation
The statement suggests that most cases concerning civil liberties are easy and straightforward. However, this is not always the case. Civil liberties cases can often be complex and involve various legal and constitutional issues. They may require careful analysis of laws, precedents, and individual rights. Therefore, the statement is false as it oversimplifies the nature of civil liberties cases.Rate this question:
-
- 4.
Which of the following statements about civil liberties is FALSE?
- A.
The first Congress passed the Bill of Rights
- B.
All of the original states had their own bills of rights
- C.
The American people are entirely devoted to political rights in both theory and practice.
- D.
Our civil liberties often conflict.
Correct Answer
C. The American people are entirely devoted to political rights in both theory and practice.Explanation
The statement "The American people are entirely devoted to political rights in both theory and practice" is false. While political rights are an important aspect of civil liberties, it is not accurate to say that the American people are entirely devoted to them. There are often debates and conflicts over the interpretation and implementation of political rights, and not all individuals or groups may prioritize or support these rights in the same way. Additionally, civil liberties encompass a wide range of rights and freedoms beyond just political rights.Rate this question:
-
- 5.
In literal terms, the First Amendment is directed toward
- A.
The states
- B.
Congress
- C.
The Courts
- D.
All units of government
Correct Answer
B. CongressExplanation
The First Amendment is directed towards Congress because it is a part of the United States Constitution and specifically limits the powers of Congress in regards to freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly, and petition. The amendment prohibits Congress from making any laws that would infringe upon these rights. It does not directly apply to the states, courts, or all units of government, as they are subject to their own separate limitations and regulations.Rate this question:
-
- 6.
In the case of Barron v. Baltimore (1833), the Supreme Court held that the Bill of Rights restrained only the national government, not the states and cities
- A.
True
- B.
False
Correct Answer
A. TrueExplanation
The explanation for the correct answer, True, is that in the case of Barron v. Baltimore (1833), the Supreme Court ruled that the Bill of Rights only limited the powers of the federal government and did not apply to the states and cities. This decision established the principle of dual federalism, which held that the federal government and state governments were separate and independent entities with their own spheres of authority. Therefore, the Bill of Rights did not directly protect individuals from state and local government actions.Rate this question:
-
- 7.
Freedom of speech was incorporated into state laws by
- A.
Barron v. Baltimore
- B.
The first Congress
- C.
Gitlow v. New York
- D.
The Tenth Amendment
Correct Answer
C. Gitlow v. New YorkExplanation
Gitlow v. New York is the correct answer because this landmark Supreme Court case established that the First Amendment's protection of freedom of speech applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The case involved a socialist who was arrested for distributing pamphlets advocating for the overthrow of the government. The Court held that while the government could restrict speech that presents a clear and present danger, it could not suppress speech that merely advocated for illegal action. This decision expanded the scope of free speech protections and set a precedent for future cases involving freedom of speech at the state level.Rate this question:
-
- 8.
The Bill of RIghts
- A.
Applies only to the national government
- B.
Immediately applied to the states after ratification of the FOurteenth Amendment
- C.
Was gradually incorporated into state laws
- D.
Has always applied to the states as well as national government
Correct Answer
C. Was gradually incorporated into state lawsExplanation
The correct answer is that the Bill of Rights was gradually incorporated into state laws. This means that the protections and rights outlined in the Bill of Rights were not initially applied to the states, but over time, through various court cases and legal interpretations, they were extended to apply to state governments as well. This process of incorporation ensured that individuals' rights were protected not only from the national government but also from state governments.Rate this question:
-
- 9.
According to Thomas Jefferson, the First Amendment was designed to create
- A.
A national church
- B.
Federal support for religious pursuits
- C.
A wall of separation between church and state
- D.
Government control of churches
Correct Answer
C. A wall of separation between church and stateExplanation
The correct answer is "a wall of separation between church and state." Thomas Jefferson believed that the First Amendment was intended to establish a clear separation between religious institutions and the government. This means that the government should not interfere with or control religious practices, and religious institutions should not have influence over government affairs. This concept of separation is often referred to as the "wall of separation between church and state."Rate this question:
-
- 10.
The "wall of separation" separates
- A.
Assembly and association
- B.
Government and religion
- C.
Protected and unprotected speech
- D.
Civil liberties and civil rights
Correct Answer
B. Government and religionExplanation
The "wall of separation" refers to the concept of keeping government and religion separate. This principle is derived from the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, which prohibits the government from establishing a religion or interfering with the free exercise of religion. The idea behind this separation is to ensure that the government remains neutral and does not favor or endorse any particular religion, allowing individuals to freely practice their own beliefs without government interference. This separation also helps to protect religious freedom and prevent the government from imposing religious beliefs on its citizens.Rate this question:
-
- 11.
According to the Supreme Court, school-sponsored prayers in public schools are acceptable only with certain restrictions.
- A.
True
- B.
False
Correct Answer
B. FalseExplanation
According to the Supreme Court, school-sponsored prayers in public schools are not acceptable without certain restrictions. The court has ruled that such prayers violate the First Amendment's Establishment Clause, which prohibits the government from endorsing or promoting any religion. Therefore, the correct answer is False.Rate this question:
-
- 12.
Which of the following statements regarding religion in the United States in recent years is FALSE?
- A.
Religious issues and controversies have assumed much greater importance in political debate.
- B.
Fundamentalist religious groups have shied away from political action due to recent controversies
- C.
Some groups have advocated the teaching of "intelligent design" as an alternative to evolution in the public school.
- D.
Conservative Republicans have pushed for a constitutional amendment permitting school prayer.
Correct Answer
B. Fundamentalist religious groups have shied away from political action due to recent controversies -
- 13.
Who said, "The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting 'fire' in a theater and causeing a panic"?
- A.
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes
- B.
Justice Hugo Black
- C.
Justice Thurgood Marshall
- D.
Justice Potter STewart
- E.
Darth Vader
Correct Answer
A. Justice Oliver Wendell HolmesExplanation
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said, "The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting 'fire' in a theater and causing a panic." This quote is often used to explain the limits of free speech. It implies that while free speech is protected, there are certain situations where it can be restricted, such as when it poses a clear and present danger to public safety.Rate this question:
-
- 14.
Prior restraint
- A.
Is frequently exercised by the United STates government
- B.
Was allowed in Near v. Minnesota (1931)
- C.
Means government prevention of publication
- D.
Allows a newspaper to print libelous materials
Correct Answer
C. Means government prevention of publicationExplanation
Prior restraint refers to the government's ability to prevent the publication or dissemination of certain information or materials. This concept was established in the case of Near v. Minnesota in 1931, where the Supreme Court ruled that the government could exercise prior restraint in certain circumstances. Therefore, the correct answer states that prior restraint means government prevention of publication, indicating that the government has the authority to stop the publication of certain materials or information.Rate this question:
-
- 15.
According to the SUpreme Court in the case of Schenck v. United STates (1919), free speech can be restricted by the government only on the basis of
- A.
Obscenity
- B.
Community sentiment
- C.
Symbolic protest
- D.
Clear and present danger
Correct Answer
D. Clear and present dangerExplanation
In the case of Schenck v. United States (1919), the Supreme Court established the principle that free speech can be restricted by the government only if it presents a "clear and present danger." This means that speech or expression can be limited if it poses an immediate threat to public safety or national security. The Court ruled that in times of war or potential danger, the government has the authority to restrict certain forms of speech that could incite violence or harm. This decision set a precedent for balancing the protection of free speech with the need to maintain public order and safety.Rate this question:
-
- 16.
In the caes of Dennis v. United States (1951), the SUpreme Court permitted the government to
- A.
Exercise prior restraint over certain publications
- B.
Jail some American Communist Party leaders
- C.
Prohibit all forms of symbolic speech
- D.
Use wiretaps to spy on American citizens
Correct Answer
B. Jail some American Communist Party leadersExplanation
In the case of Dennis v. United States (1951), the Supreme Court ruled that the government could jail some American Communist Party leaders. This decision was based on the belief that the party's advocacy for the violent overthrow of the government posed a clear and present danger to national security. The Court held that the First Amendment did not protect speech that incited or advocated for the overthrow of the government by force. Therefore, the government was justified in imprisoning these leaders to protect the country from potential harm.Rate this question:
-
- 17.
Constitutional protections of free speech diminish once a person steps on private property.
- A.
True
- B.
False
Correct Answer
A. TrueExplanation
The statement is true because constitutional protections of free speech primarily apply to government actions and restrictions. When a person steps onto private property, they are subject to the rules and regulations set by the property owner, which may include limitations on free speech. Private property owners have the right to control the activities and behavior on their property, including speech, as long as it does not violate any other laws or regulations. Therefore, constitutional protections of free speech are not as strong on private property compared to public spaces.Rate this question:
-
- 18.
Some states have passed shield laws that protect
- A.
Criminals from self-incrimination
- B.
Publications from prior restraint
- C.
Reporters' notes and information from being revealed in court
- D.
Courts from holding trials in public
Correct Answer
C. Reporters' notes and information from being revealed in courtExplanation
Some states have passed shield laws that protect reporters' notes and information from being revealed in court. These laws are designed to uphold the principles of freedom of the press and protect journalists from being forced to disclose their sources or provide evidence that could compromise their ability to gather news. By safeguarding reporters' notes and information, shield laws aim to maintain the integrity and independence of the press and ensure that journalists can fulfill their role in society without fear of legal repercussions.Rate this question:
-
- 19.
In Roth v. United States (1957), the Supreme Court ruled that obscene material was not within the realm of constitutionally protected speech or press.
- A.
True
- B.
False
Correct Answer
A. TrueExplanation
In Roth v. United States (1957), the Supreme Court determined that obscene material does not fall under the protection of the First Amendment, which guarantees freedom of speech and press. This means that the government can regulate or restrict the distribution of obscene material without violating the Constitution. Therefore, the statement "obscene material was not within the realm of constitutionally protected speech or press" is true.Rate this question:
-
- 20.
"I know it when I see it" refers to
- A.
Obscenity
- B.
Libel
- C.
Crime
- D.
Cruel and unusual punishment
Correct Answer
A. ObscenityExplanation
The phrase "I know it when I see it" is commonly used to refer to obscenity. This means that while it may be difficult to define obscenity explicitly, people can recognize it when they encounter it. The answer choice "obscenity" aligns with this understanding of the phrase.Rate this question:
-
- 21.
In Miller v. California (1973), defining obscenity was left up to
- A.
Private individuals
- B.
Courts
- C.
Congress
- D.
State and local officials
Correct Answer
D. State and local officialsExplanation
In Miller v. California (1973), the Supreme Court ruled that the definition of obscenity should be determined by state and local officials. This decision shifted the responsibility of defining obscenity from the federal level to the state and local authorities. It allowed different jurisdictions to establish their own standards and guidelines for determining what material is considered obscene within their respective communities. This decision aimed to respect the diversity of values and opinions across different regions, giving local authorities the power to reflect the community's standards in defining obscenity.Rate this question:
-
- 22.
The newest issue in the obscenity controversy involves
- A.
Regulations aimed at keeping obscene material away from the young
- B.
The proliferation of pornography on the internet
- C.
The proliferation of pornography in video stores
- D.
The use of obscene words in public places
Correct Answer
C. The proliferation of pornograpHy in video storesExplanation
The correct answer is the proliferation of pornography in video stores. This answer is supported by the fact that the question is asking about the newest issue in the obscenity controversy, and out of the given options, the proliferation of pornography in video stores is the most recent and relevant issue. The other options, such as regulations aimed at keeping obscene material away from the young and the use of obscene words in public places, may be related to the obscenity controversy but are not specifically mentioned as the newest issue. The proliferation of pornography on the internet is also a relevant issue, but it is not mentioned in the question.Rate this question:
-
- 23.
To be libelous, a statement must be knowingly false or malicious
- A.
True
- B.
False
Correct Answer
A. TrueExplanation
For a statement to be considered libelous, it must meet two criteria: it must be knowingly false and it must be made with malicious intent. If a statement is made with the knowledge that it is false and with the intention to harm someone's reputation, it can be considered libelous. Therefore, the statement in the question is true.Rate this question:
-
- 24.
The Supreme Court case of New York Times v. Sullivan (1964)
- A.
Made it easier for public officials to win libel cases
- B.
Held that statements about public officials are libelous only if made with malice and reckless disregard for the truth
- C.
Held that statements about public officials are libelous is they are intended to damage severely the person's reputation
- D.
Severely limited the ability of the press to express its opinions freely
Correct Answer
B. Held that statements about public officials are libelous only if made with malice and reckless disregard for the truthExplanation
The Supreme Court case of New York Times v. Sullivan (1964) held that statements about public officials are libelous only if made with malice and reckless disregard for the truth. This means that public officials have a higher burden of proof compared to private individuals when it comes to winning libel cases. The court's decision aimed to protect freedom of speech and the press by ensuring that public officials could not easily silence criticism or dissenting opinions through defamation lawsuits.Rate this question:
-
- 25.
Private individuals have a lower standard to meet for winning lawsuits for libel than public figures.
- A.
True
- B.
False
Correct Answer
A. TrueExplanation
Private individuals have a lower standard to meet for winning lawsuits for libel than public figures because public figures are considered to have a higher threshold of proof to establish defamation. This is because public figures, due to their prominence and involvement in public affairs, are expected to endure a higher level of scrutiny and criticism. In contrast, private individuals are generally afforded greater protection as they are not typically subjected to the same level of public attention and scrutiny. Therefore, it is easier for private individuals to succeed in libel lawsuits compared to public figures.Rate this question:
-
- 26.
The Supreme Court has dealt with questions of free speech by
- A.
Allowing the government to regulate the content of speech on the airwaves
- B.
Distinguishing between pure and symbolic speech
- C.
Using a "clear and present danger" test.
- D.
All of the above
Correct Answer
D. All of the aboveExplanation
The Supreme Court has addressed issues related to free speech in various ways. Firstly, it has allowed the government to regulate the content of speech on the airwaves, recognizing the need for certain restrictions in this medium. Secondly, the Court has distinguished between pure speech (verbal or written expression) and symbolic speech (actions or gestures that convey a message), treating them differently in terms of protection. Lastly, the Court has employed a "clear and present danger" test to determine whether certain speech poses an immediate threat to public safety or national security. Therefore, the correct answer is "all of the above."Rate this question:
-
- 27.
In 1989, the SUpreme Court ruled that the burning of an American flag was a form of constitutionally protected speech.
- A.
True
- B.
False
Correct Answer
A. TrueExplanation
The Supreme Court ruling in 1989 declared that burning an American flag is a form of constitutionally protected speech. This means that individuals have the right to express their opinions and beliefs by burning the flag, as it falls under the protection of the First Amendment. This ruling was based on the principle of freedom of expression and the court's interpretation of the Constitution.Rate this question:
-
- 28.
Which of the following has received the greatest amount of regulation by the federal government?
- A.
Symbolic speech
- B.
Commercial speech
- C.
Television news
- D.
Newspapers
Correct Answer
B. Commercial speechExplanation
Commercial speech has received the greatest amount of regulation by the federal government. This is because commercial speech refers to any speech that promotes a commercial transaction, such as advertising or marketing. The government regulates commercial speech to protect consumers from false or misleading advertisements, ensure fair competition, and promote public health and safety. Various laws and regulations, such as the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Lanham Act, have been enacted to govern and regulate commercial speech. On the other hand, symbolic speech, television news, and newspapers have comparatively less regulation by the federal government.Rate this question:
-
- 29.
The Federal Communications Commission regulates the content, nature, and licensing of radio, television, and newspapers
- A.
True
- B.
False
Correct Answer
A. TrueExplanation
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is indeed responsible for regulating the content, nature, and licensing of radio, television, and newspapers. The FCC is an independent agency of the United States government that was created to regulate interstate and international communications by radio, television, wire, satellite, and cable. It sets the standards for broadcast content, enforces rules on obscenity, indecency, and profanity, and issues licenses to broadcasters. Therefore, the statement "The Federal Communications Commission regulates the content, nature, and licensing of radio, television, and newspapers" is true.Rate this question:
-
- 30.
The Supreme Court has
- A.
Ruled that newspapers must provide space for political candidates to reply to newspaper criticisms.
- B.
Allowed the policy of barring certain words from radio or television when children might hear them.
- C.
Ruled that cable television is subject to the same regulations as commercial television
- D.
All of the above
Correct Answer
B. Allowed the policy of barring certain words from radio or television when children might hear them.Explanation
The correct answer is "allowed the policy of barring certain words from radio or television when children might hear them." This answer is supported by the statement that the Supreme Court ruled in favor of allowing the policy of barring certain words from radio or television when children might hear them. This suggests that the Supreme Court has made a decision to support the implementation of restrictions on certain words in order to protect children from exposure to inappropriate content on broadcast media.Rate this question:
-
- 31.
Freedom of assembly only concerns the literal right of people to gather in one place.
- A.
True
- B.
False
Correct Answer
B. FalseExplanation
The statement is false because freedom of assembly encompasses more than just the literal right to gather in one place. It also includes the right to express opinions, engage in peaceful protests, and form associations with others. This fundamental right allows individuals to come together and collectively voice their concerns, advocate for change, and participate in democratic processes. Therefore, freedom of assembly goes beyond the physical act of gathering and extends to the broader concept of civic engagement and expression.Rate this question:
-
- 32.
The Supreme Court has ruled that spontaneous demonstrations at any time, anywhere, and in any way are protected by the First Amendment's freedom of assembly.
- A.
True
- B.
False
Correct Answer
B. FalseExplanation
The given statement is false. While the First Amendment does protect the right to freedom of assembly, it does not mean that spontaneous demonstrations are always protected. The Supreme Court has recognized that the government can impose reasonable restrictions on the time, place, and manner of assembly. These restrictions are often put in place to ensure public safety and order. Therefore, spontaneous demonstrations may not always be protected if they violate these reasonable restrictions.Rate this question:
-
- 33.
Most of the words contained in the Bill of Rights pertain to the rights of persons accused of crime.
- A.
True
- B.
False
Correct Answer
A. TrueExplanation
The statement is true because the Bill of Rights is the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution, and many of these amendments are focused on protecting the rights of individuals accused of crimes. For example, the Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures, the Fifth Amendment guarantees due process and protection against self-incrimination, the Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to a fair trial, and the Eighth Amendment protects against cruel and unusual punishment. These rights are essential in ensuring that individuals accused of crimes are treated fairly and have their rights protected.Rate this question:
-
- 34.
The most infrequent even in the criminal justice system is a
- A.
Crime
- B.
Arrest
- C.
Prosecution
- D.
Trial
Correct Answer
D. TrialExplanation
The most infrequent event in the criminal justice system is a trial. This is because the majority of criminal cases are resolved through plea bargains or settlements, where the defendant agrees to plead guilty in exchange for a lesser sentence. Trials are resource-intensive and time-consuming, and both the prosecution and defense often prefer to avoid them if possible. Therefore, trials are relatively rare compared to other stages in the criminal justice process such as crime, arrest, and prosecution.Rate this question:
-
- 35.
In Mapp v. Ohio (1961), the Supreme Court
- A.
Extended the principle of unreasonable searches and seizures to the states
- B.
Established the exclusionary rule
- C.
Required probable cause to make an arrest
- D.
Protected individuals against self-incrimination
Correct Answer
B. Established the exclusionary ruleExplanation
In Mapp v. Ohio (1961), the Supreme Court established the exclusionary rule. This means that any evidence obtained illegally or in violation of the Fourth Amendment cannot be used in court against the defendant. This ruling was significant as it extended the principle of unreasonable searches and seizures to the states, ensuring that individuals are protected from unlawful searches by law enforcement. By establishing the exclusionary rule, the Supreme Court aimed to safeguard individuals' constitutional rights and prevent the use of illegally obtained evidence in criminal cases.Rate this question:
-
- 36.
The exclusionary rule prohibits a court's use of
- A.
Illegally seized evidence
- B.
Cruel and unusual punishment
- C.
Search warrants
- D.
Plea bargaining
Correct Answer
A. Illegally seized evidenceExplanation
The exclusionary rule prohibits a court's use of illegally seized evidence. This rule states that evidence obtained through illegal searches, seizures, or other violations of constitutional rights cannot be used in court proceedings. This is to protect individuals from unlawful searches and to deter law enforcement from engaging in unconstitutional practices. The exclusionary rule ensures that the justice system upholds the Fourth Amendment rights of individuals and promotes fairness in criminal trials.Rate this question:
-
- 37.
Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination begins with
- A.
A trial
- B.
Prosecution
- C.
An arrest
- D.
Criminal sentencing
Correct Answer
C. An arrestExplanation
The Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination begins with an arrest. This means that individuals cannot be forced to incriminate themselves or provide evidence against themselves from the moment they are arrested. It is a fundamental right that ensures individuals are not coerced into admitting guilt or providing information that may be used against them in a criminal case. This protection extends throughout the legal process, including during trial, prosecution, and criminal sentencing.Rate this question:
-
- 38.
According to the Supreme Court's decision in Miranda v. Arizona (1966), police suspects must be told that
- A.
They are constitutionally entitled to remain silent
- B.
Anything they say can be used against them
- C.
They have a right to have a lawyer present during police questioning
- D.
All of the above
Correct Answer
D. All of the aboveExplanation
According to the Supreme Court's decision in Miranda v. Arizona (1966), police suspects must be informed of their constitutional rights, which include the right to remain silent, the understanding that anything they say can be used against them, and the right to have a lawyer present during police questioning. This ruling ensures that individuals are aware of their rights and can exercise them when interacting with law enforcement.Rate this question:
-
- 39.
The Sixth Amendment's guarantee of a right to a lawyer was extended to state courts by the SUpreme court case of
- A.
Miranda v. Arizona (1966)
- B.
Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
- C.
Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
- D.
Gregg v. Georgia (1976)
Correct Answer
B. Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)Explanation
The correct answer is Gideon v. Wainwright (1963). In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that the Sixth Amendment's guarantee of a right to a lawyer applies to state courts as well. The case involved Clarence Gideon, who was charged with a felony in Florida but was not provided with a lawyer. Gideon argued that his right to counsel had been violated, and the Supreme Court agreed, stating that the right to counsel is a fundamental right essential to a fair trial. This landmark decision established the principle that indigent defendants have a right to legal representation in state courts.Rate this question:
-
- 40.
Most criminal cases are settled through plea bargaining.
- A.
True
- B.
False
Correct Answer
A. TrueExplanation
Plea bargaining is a common practice in the criminal justice system where the defendant agrees to plead guilty to a lesser charge or to cooperate with the prosecution in exchange for a reduced sentence or other benefits. This process helps to expedite the legal process, reduce the burden on the court system, and allows both parties to avoid the uncertainties and costs associated with a trial. Therefore, it is true that most criminal cases are settled through plea bargaining.Rate this question:
-
- 41.
The Constitution
- A.
Does not specify the size of a jury
- B.
Sets jury size at twelve
- C.
Sets jury size according to the type of crime
- D.
Sets jury size according to the type of court
Correct Answer
A. Does not specify the size of a juryExplanation
The Constitution does not specify the size of a jury, meaning that it does not provide a specific number of jurors required for a trial. This allows for flexibility in determining the jury size, which can vary depending on the jurisdiction, type of crime, or type of court. The decision on the size of a jury is typically left to the discretion of the legal system, allowing for adjustments based on the specific circumstances of each case.Rate this question:
-
- 42.
The SUpreme COurt has ruled that the death penalty
- A.
Is suitable to the most extreme of crimes
- B.
Is always unconstitutional
- C.
Can be made mandatory for certain crimes
- D.
Is the highest form of cruel and unusual punishment
Correct Answer
A. Is suitable to the most extreme of crimesExplanation
The Supreme Court has ruled that the death penalty is suitable to the most extreme of crimes. This means that in cases where the crime committed is considered to be extremely heinous or severe, the death penalty can be considered as a suitable punishment. The Supreme Court's ruling suggests that the death penalty should only be applied in situations where the crime is of the utmost gravity and warrants the highest form of punishment.Rate this question:
-
- 43.
The Bill of Rights spells out the right of privacy in the Third Amendment
- A.
True
- B.
False
Correct Answer
B. FalseExplanation
The Third Amendment of the Bill of Rights does not specifically address the right to privacy. It states that "No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law." The right to privacy is generally understood to be protected under the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures. Therefore, the statement that the Bill of Rights spells out the right of privacy in the Third Amendment is false.Rate this question:
-
- 44.
In Roe v. Wade (1973), the Supreme court
- A.
Forbade state regulation of abortion during the first trimester.
- B.
Permitted states to allow abortion in the second timester only to protect a mother's health.
- C.
Permitted states to forbid abortions in the third trimester.
- D.
All of the above
Correct Answer
D. All of the aboveExplanation
The correct answer is "all of the above" because in Roe v. Wade (1973), the Supreme Court made several rulings regarding abortion. They forbade state regulation of abortion during the first trimester, permitted states to allow abortion in the second trimester only to protect a mother's health, and permitted states to forbid abortions in the third trimester. Therefore, all of these statements are true based on the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade.Rate this question:
-
- 45.
Which of the following statements about recent Supreme Court decisions concerning abortion is FALSE?
- A.
It has upheld state laws forbidding the use of state funds to pay for abortions
- B.
It has upheld a ban on abortion counseling in federally supported family planning programs
- C.
It has upheld a law requiring a married woman to tell her husband of her intent to have an abortion
- D.
It has upheld a law requiring a 24-hour waitin period prior to an abortion.
Correct Answer
C. It has upHeld a law requiring a married woman to tell her husband of her intent to have an abortionExplanation
The given statement is false because the Supreme Court has not upheld a law requiring a married woman to tell her husband of her intent to have an abortion. The court has ruled that such a requirement violates a woman's constitutional right to privacy and autonomy in making decisions about her own body.Rate this question:
-
- 46.
Which of the following statements is FALSE?
- A.
First Amendment rights are essential to a democracy.
- B.
Ultimately, Congress decides what constitutional guarantees mean in practice.
- C.
The courts enhance democracy by protecting liberty and equality from the excesses of majority rule.
- D.
The Bill of Rights places strict limitations on governmental power.
Correct Answer
B. Ultimately, Congress decides what constitutional guarantees mean in practice.Explanation
The statement "Ultimately, Congress decides what constitutional guarantees mean in practice" is false. In reality, it is the role of the judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court, to interpret the Constitution and determine the meaning and application of constitutional guarantees. The courts play a crucial role in safeguarding individual rights and ensuring that the government acts within the boundaries set by the Constitution. Congress, on the other hand, is responsible for making laws and enacting legislation, but it does not have the final say in interpreting the Constitution.Rate this question:
-
- 47.
In general, civil liberties limit the scope of government.
- A.
True
- B.
False
Correct Answer
A. TrueExplanation
Civil liberties refer to the basic rights and freedoms that individuals have, such as freedom of speech, religion, and assembly. These liberties are essential in limiting the power and control of the government over its citizens. By guaranteeing these rights, civil liberties ensure that the government cannot infringe upon individual freedoms and protects individuals from potential abuses of power. Therefore, it is true that civil liberties generally restrict the scope of government authority.Rate this question:
-
Quiz Review Timeline +
Our quizzes are rigorously reviewed, monitored and continuously updated by our expert board to maintain accuracy, relevance, and timeliness.
-
Current Version
-
Oct 06, 2023Quiz Edited by
ProProfs Editorial Team -
Dec 08, 2012Quiz Created by
Taptapbritt2
Back to top