Ap Government And Politics - Test 1

Front 1

Civil Liberties

Back 1

Protections the constitution provides against abuse of the government.

Front 2

Sedition Act

Back 2

1787, protected against bogus and/or scandalous writing that defamed the president and/or government.

Front 3

Espionage and Sedition Acts

Back 3

1917 - 1918, prohibited false statements that would interfere with the military, to send through mail, or to speak about anything against the US government.

Front 4

Who was a major proponent of the espionage and sedition acts?

Back 4

General A. Mitchell Palmer

Front 5

Smith Act

Back 5

1940, Made it illegal to attempt to overthrow the US government by force

Front 6

Communist Control Act

Back 6

1954, Communists in conspiracy to overthrow the government

Front 7

Internal Security Act

Back 7

1950, made the communist party register with the government

Front 8

Name 2 laws designated to protect the Nation during times of war.

Back 8

Smith Act, Internal Security Act, Communist Control Act, or the Espionage and Sedition Acts.

Front 9

Due Process of Law

Back 9

Denies the government, without process, to deny anyone life, liberty, or property

Front 10

Equal protection of Laws

Back 10

Standard of equal treatment that must be expressed by the government. As stated in the "equal protection clause" and the 14th amendment.

Front 11

Selective Incorporation

Back 11

Some laws apply to states and federal government.

Front 12

Name a Supreme Court Case that calls for selective incorporation.

Back 12

The Gitlow Case which considered freedom of speech and of the press; and the Palkow case which stated that states must follow fundamental liberties.

Front 13

Name rights that states do not have.

Back 13

The right to bear arms, ban excessive bails/fines, jury trial in civil cases, and the right to be indicted by a grand jury before the trial.

Front 14

What is prior restraint and what justice coined the term?

Back 14

Censoring a work before publication and William Blackstone.

Front 15

When is the "Clear and Present Danger Test" used?

Back 15

In court cases dealing with freedom of speech. It states that law should not punish speech unless it presents a clear and present danger.

Front 16

What was the premise behind Colin v Smith in 1978?

Back 16

A conflict with freedom of speech, as a group of Neo-Nazis wanted to march through a predominantly Jewish neighborhood.

Front 17

What are the 4 types of speech not under full constitutional protection?

Back 17

libel, obscenity, symbolic speech, and false advertising.

Front 18

Define Libel.

Back 18

Writing that falsely injures another person.

Front 19

What is the oral form of libel?

Back 19

Slander.

Front 20

Define obscenity.

Back 20

A work with no social value that can be regulated by the state.

Front 21

What is symbolic speech?

Back 21

An act that portrays a political message.

Front 22

What was the conclusion of Miller v California in 1993?

Back 22

That obscenity constitutes a work with no scientific, artistic, literary, or political value and appeals to the prurient interests of the average person.

Front 23

What was the conclusion of Schneck v US in 1919?

Back 23

That speech was punishable if it failed to pass the clear and present danger test.

Front 24

What was the conclusion of Texas v Johnson in 1989?

Back 24

There is no law to ban flag burning.

Front 25

What was the conclusion of Students v Hazelwood High School in 1988?

Back 25

School-sponsored activities can be regulated as long as there are legitimate pediological concerns.

Front 26

What amendment contains th free exercise and the establishment clauses?

Back 26

The 1st

Front 27

Define the free exercise clause.

Back 27

Law cannot prevent the free exercise of religion.

Front 28

Define the establishment clause.

Back 28

Ban on laws "respecting an establishment of religion".

Front 29

Wall-of-separation Principle

Back 29

Court ruling that government cannot be involved with religion.

Front 30

Name three reasons that involvement in religion would be appropriate for the government.

Back 30

Serves a secular purpose, effects neither advance nor prohibit a religion, doesn't foster an excessive government entanglement with religion.

Front 31

Define the Exclusionary Rule.

Back 31

That improperly gathered evidence may not be used in court.

Front 32

What was the conclusion of Engel v Vitale in 1962?

Back 32

That there shall be no prayer in public schools.

Front 33

What was the conclusion of Everson v Board of Ed in 1947?

Back 33

The Wall-of-Separation principle.

Front 34

What was the conclusion of Lee v Weisman in 1992?

Back 34

That there can be no clergy at a public school graduation

Front 35

What was the conclusion of Lemon v Kurtzman in 1971?

Back 35

The Lemon test which regulated government abuse of religion.

Front 36

What was the conclusion of Santa Fe School District v Doe in 2000?

Back 36

That there shall be no prayer before a football game at public schools.

Front 37

What was the conclusion of Zelman v Simmons-Harris in 2000?

Back 37

That it is constitutional to provide vouchers to pay school bills, even for parochial schools.

Front 38

What was the conclusion of Zarauch v Clausen in 1952?

Back 38

That public schools can release students for private religious instruction.

Front 39

Name 2 cases that affected search and seizure.

Back 39

Mapp v Ohio and Miranda v Arizona

Front 40

Define a search warrant and a reason for issuance.

Back 40

Order from the judge authorizing search of a place, and a justification is called probably cause.

Front 41

Define the Miranda Rule.

Back 41

A warning issued by police on arrest

Front 42

Define a good faith exception.

Back 42

An error in gathering evidence so sufficiently minor that it may stand in trial.

Front 43

What was the conclusion of the US v Dickerson in 2000?

Back 43

That the Mapp decision can not be altered by law.

Front 44

What was the conclusion of Gideon v Wainwright in 1964?

Back 44

That everyone has the right to an attorney.

Front 45

Define the US patriot act and the year it was passed.

Back 45

2001, increase in federal power to capture terrorists. Stipulated telephone and internet taps; grand jury info; access to voice mail, money laundering, immigration, and crime.

Front 46

What was the conclusion of Rasul v Bush in 2004?

Back 46

That terrorists have access to a neutral court and to see legally detained.

Front 47

What was the conclusion of US v Leon in 1984?

Back 47

The Good Faith Exception.

Front 48

Define civil rights.

Back 48

The rights of people to be treated without unreasonable or unconstitutional differences.

Front 49

Define suspect classifications.

Back 49

classifications based on race and ethnicity that have been deemed unconstitutional.

Front 50

Define Strict Scrutiny.

Back 50

A Supreme court test to see is a law denies equal protection because it does not serve a state interest and is not narrowly tailored to achieve that goal.

Front 51

Morse v Frederichs

Back 51

Student uses elicit banner at school function. Court finds it constitutional for the school to punish the boy to uphold the morals of the school environment.

Front 52

What are the three prongs to test obscenity?

Back 52

The work must be taken as a whole, appeal to prurient/sexual interests, lacking in scientific, artistic, literary, and political value.

Front 53

Who was Maple Thorp?

Back 53

Photographer who used a public grant to create elicit photos.

Front 54

What was the premise and conclusion of Plessy v Ferguson in 1896?

Back 54

Plessy, a black man, didn't want to move into the black train car. The court found it constitutional to charge him, creating the "seperate but equal doctrine"

Front 55

Name the case that overturned Plessy v Ferguson.

Back 55

Brown v Board of Education in 1954.

Front 56

What was the premise and conclusion of Cummings v Board of Education?

Back 56

A Georgia community closed a black public high school, keeping only the white one opened and denied access to blacks. The court said this was constitutional because blacks could go to private school.

Front 57

What was the premise and conclusion of Lloyd Gaines v Missouri in 1938?

Back 57

Gaines was admitted to a white school because there was no black alternative.

Front 58

What was the conclusion of Sipuel v Oklahoma Law School in 1948?

Back 58

A black man attended a white school, but in a separate section.

Front 59

What was the Southern Manifesto?

Back 59

The uproar in 1956 of 100 members of congress to reverse Brown v Board of Education

Front 60

Define de jure segregation.

Back 60

segregation by law

Front 61

Define de facto segregation.

Back 61

Segregation created by geography.

Front 62

What was the conclusion of Green v County School Board of New Kent County?

Back 62

"freedom-of-choice" plan does not change anything. There must be racial integration not just outlawing separation

Front 63

What was the conclusion of Swann v Charoltte-Mecklenberg Board of Education?

Back 63

Set guidelines for school integration (approved busing and re-drawing of school lines).

Front 64

Define civil disobedience.

Back 64

Opposing a law that one considers unjust by peacefully disobeying it and accepting punishment

Front 65

Give reasons for the passing of the civil rights acts.

Back 65

The breaking of the filibuster of 1964, Eugene "Bull" Connor's use of hoses in May '63 protests, and the assassination of Kennedy.

Front 66

The Civil Rights Act of '57,'60, & '65 dealt with _________.

Back 66

protecting the right to vote.

Front 67

The Civil Rights Act of '68 dealt with _________.

Back 67

Housing.

Front 68

The Civil Rights Act of '64 dealt with _________.

Back 68

Voting, employment, schooling, and public accommodations.

Front 69

What was the 19th amendment?

Back 69

Womens' suffrage

Front 70

Reed v Reed (1971)

Back 70

Gender discrimination is a violation of the "equal protection" clause of the constitution.

Front 71

Graig v Borren (1976)

Back 71

Gender Discrimination justification must be important to governmental objectives and related to these objectives.

Front 72

Rokster v Goldberg (1981)

Back 72

Congress can draft men and not women

Front 73

US v Virginia (1996)

Back 73

States may not finance an all male military school.

Front 74

What are the 2 forms of sexual harassment?

Back 74

Sexual acts for bonuses or promotions and hostile, intimidating work environment made by sexual teasing, joking, and obscenity.

Front 75

Griswold v Connecticut (1965)

Back 75

States can not ban selling contraceptives

Front 76

Roe v Wade (1973)

Back 76

State laws against abortion unconstitutional

Front 77

Hyde Amendment to Roe v Wade

Back 77

No federal funding for abortions.

Front 78

Webster v Reproductive Health Services (1989)

Back 78

Banned abortions from public hospital and allowed doctors to test to see if fetuses were feasible.

Front 79

Planned Parenthood v Casey (1992)

Back 79

Reaffirmed Roe v Wade, but imposed limits

Front 80

Steinberg v Carhart (2000)

Back 80

States may not ban partial birth abortions if they fail to make an exception to protect the health of the mother

Front 81

Define Equality of Results and give an example.

Back 81

Making sure people receive the same results, affirmative action

Front 82

Define Equality of opportunity

Back 82

Giving people an equal chance to succeed

Front 83

What is another word for Equality of results used by critics?

Back 83

Reverse Discrimination

Front 84

United Steel Workers v Weber (1979)

Back 84

Despite the ban on racial classifications in the 1964 civil rights act, this act upheld the use of race in employment agreement between the steelworkers union and steel plant.

Front 85

Regents of the University of California v Bakke (1978)

Back 85

Decisive point from justice Powell who stated that a quota-like ban would not be tolerated, but diversity was a legitimate goal that could be pursued by taking race into account

Front 86

Richmond v Crason (1989)

Back 86

Affirmative Action plans must be judged via the strict scrutiny test which requires that the plan must be narrowly-tailored to serve a compelling interest

Front 87

Grutter v Bollinger & Grotz v Bollinger (2003)

Back 87

Numerical benefits may not be used to admit minorities into college, but race may be a "plus factor" in making those decisions

Front 88

Boy Scouts of America v Dale (2000)

Back 88

Private organizations may ban gays from membership

Front 89

Defense of Marriage Act (1996)

Back 89

No state has to give legal status to a same sex couple married in another state

Front 90

Lawrence v Texas (2003)

Back 90

Made sexual acts between the same sex illegal

Front 91

Bowers v Hardwick

Back 91

Struck down Lawrence v Texas, which made sodomy illegal.

Front 92

Name the 2 types of courts that deal with non-Supreme Court cases.

Back 92

Legislative and Constitutional

Front 93

What are the three types of constitutional courts?

Back 93

District, Supreme, and Court of Appeals

Front 94

What is the lowest federal court?

Back 94

A district court

Front 95

Define a litmus test.

Back 95

examination of political ideology of a judge before appointment.

Front 96

Define a federal questions case.

Back 96

Cases concerning the constitution, federal laws, or treaties.

Front 97

Define a diversity case.

Back 97

Cases involving citizens of different states.

Front 98

What type of case is left to the states?

Back 98

Ones not constituted as a federal question or a diversity case.

Front 99

Define the dual sovereignty Doctrine.

Back 99

Each level of government has the right to enact laws for its own purposes, Neither wants a block to persecution of a court that gives defendant sympathy

Front 100

Define the writ of certiorari.

Back 100

If 4 judges would like to hear case they issue a writ.

Front 101

Define fee shifting.

Back 101

Enables the plaintiff to recover costs from defendant if they win.

Front 102

What are the three rules to defining standing?

Back 102

Must be a controversy between adversaries, show harm, and taxpayer isn't a justification

Front 103

What does a class action suit have to do to bring their case to the Supreme Court as of 1974?

Back 103

All affected by the case/situation must be notified, for cases involving indecent monetary charges

Front 104

Who confirms appointments and impeachments of the Supreme Court?

Back 104

The Senate

Front 105

Texas v Johnson

Back 105

Johnson allowed to burn flag, though it is representative of freedom, after administering the clear-and-present danger test

Front 106

What does the 4th amendment prohibit?

Back 106

unreasonable searches and seizures

Front 107

Colorado v Bertine (1987)

Back 107

Court finds it acceptable to search interior of car and items within the car after the arrest of a person.

Front 108

Carrol v US (1925)

Back 108

May search vehicles without a warrant

Front 109

What are the six exceptions to requiring a warrant to search and seize?

Back 109

Stop and Frisk, emergency situations, plain view, voluntary agreement, mobile vehicles, and person's body after arrest for safety purposes.

Front 110

Massachusetts v Sheppard (1984)

Back 110

If police secure a warrant that later turns out to be defective, the evidence still stands

Front 111

What case instates the "exclusionary rule"?

Back 111

Mapp v Ohio, 1961

Front 112

NY v Harris (1971)

Back 112

Unconstitutionally obtained evidence can be used, but will be excluded as evidence demonstrating guilt.

Front 113

New Jersey v T.L.O (1985)

Back 113

Principal searches students purse for cigarettes and finds marijuana and implications of drug dealing

Front 114

Mergens

Back 114

Secular schools can allow non-diuptive and student led prayer

Front 115

Tinker v Des Moines

Back 115

Student wear anti-Vietnam arm bands to school. The Supreme Court decided that this was permissible as students are allowed to protest without prior restraint.

Front 116

Lemon Test

Back 116

Does it serve a secular purpose? Does it advance or inhibit religion?

Front 117

Mozert v Hawkins County Board of Education (1985)

Back 117

Religion cannot be involved in a public school curriculum unless it serves a secular purpose

Front 118

County of Allegheny v ACLU

Back 118

Public Schools may recognize secular aspects of a religious holiday.

Front 119

Lambs Chapel v Center Moriches Union Free School District

Back 119

religious groups comprised of students may be allowed the same access to facilities given to other student organizations