Quiz Final

Front 1

the majority opinion in Sweatt v. Painter did not need to consider the relative qualities of the law school options available to Sweatt because the idea of separate but equal in education was declared unconstitutional.

Back 1

False

Front 2

the court used strict scrutiny in Reed v. Reed to strike down the Idaho State law in question.

Back 2

False

Front 3

The court ruled in Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Dept. of Health that the"clear and convincing" standard of proof properly balance between individual rights and the interest of the state and therefore did not violate the 14th amendment.

Back 3

True

Front 4

In PICS v. Seattle School District No. 1, the court ruled thatracial balancing in high schools is not a compelling state interest

Back 4

True

Front 5

the law in question in craig v. boren violated the equal protection clause because the state could not demonstrate that the law prohibiting the sale of beer to males under the age of 21 was substantially related to an important government objective.

Back 5

True

Front 6

the court set a specific timetable for desegregation in public schools in Brown v. Board of Education II.

Back 6

False-no specific time

Front 7

because there was no legitimate state interest, the court declared virginia's ban on interracial marriage unconstitutional in Loving v.Virginia

Back 7

True

Front 8

In US v. Virginia, the court found that the male-only admission policy at Virginia's state run military colleges violated the 14th amendment even though the schools would have to dramatically alter their educational mission once women were admitted.

Back 8

False- dont need to change mission

Front 9

the court ruled in Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education that one race schools were not automatically unconstitutional

Back 9

True

Front 10

in Lawrence v. Texas, the court ruled that the Texas Law inquestion did not violate the equal protection clause

Back 10

True- violates right to privacy