American Government Exam 2
-
President Franklin Roosevelt’s “Court-packing plan” was motivated by his desire to create a more liberal Supreme Court that would vote to uphold New Deal programs.
-
True
-
False
-
About This Quiz
The 'American Government Exam 2' assesses understanding of federalism, the balance of state and federal powers, and key judicial decisions affecting legislative reforms. It evaluates critical historical insights and legal interpretations relevant to American governance.
Quiz Preview
- 2.
In Printz v. United States (1997), the Supreme Court struck down provisions of a federal law that required local government officials like sheriffs and police chiefs to conduct background checks on purchasers of handguns.
-
True
-
False
Correct Answer
A. TrueExplanation
The Supreme Court's decision in Printz v. United States (1997) did indeed strike down provisions of a federal law that mandated local government officials to perform background checks on handgun purchasers. This ruling was based on the principle of federalism, as the Court held that the federal government could not compel state and local officials to carry out its policies. Therefore, the answer is true.Rate this question:
-
- 3.
The Supreme Court has declared unconstitutional some state laws or state-sponsored policies that used gender-based classifications, such as the male-only admissions policy of the Virginia Military Institute.
-
True
-
False
Correct Answer
A. TrueExplanation
The Supreme Court has indeed declared unconstitutional state laws or policies that use gender-based classifications. One such example is the male-only admissions policy of the Virginia Military Institute. The Court has ruled that such classifications violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which guarantees equal treatment under the law regardless of gender. Therefore, the statement is true.Rate this question:
-
- 4.
In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the Supreme Court construed federal power narrowly and struck down legislative social reforms, like child labor laws, as exceeding Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce.
-
True
-
False
Correct Answer
A. TrueExplanation
During the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the Supreme Court had a tendency to interpret federal power in a limited way. As a result, they often declared legislative social reforms, such as child labor laws, as unconstitutional because they believed that Congress did not have the authority to regulate activities that were not directly related to interstate commerce. This approach allowed the Court to limit the reach of federal power and protect individual rights, but it also hindered the progress of certain social reforms. Therefore, the statement that the Supreme Court struck down legislative social reforms, like child labor laws, for exceeding Congress's power to regulate interstate commerce is true.Rate this question:
-
- 5.
The ___ Amendment prevents police from conducting unreasonable searches and seizures.
-
4th
-
5th
-
6th
-
8th
Correct Answer
A. 4thExplanation
The 4th Amendment to the United States Constitution protects individuals from unreasonable searches and seizures by law enforcement. It requires that search warrants be issued only upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized. This amendment ensures that individuals have a right to privacy and that law enforcement cannot intrude upon that privacy without proper justification.Rate this question:
-
- 6.
According to the Supreme Court, it is a violation of the Establishment Clause for a state to prohibit the teaching of the theory of evolution in its public schools.
-
True
-
False
Correct Answer
A. TrueExplanation
The Supreme Court has ruled that it is unconstitutional for a state to ban the teaching of the theory of evolution in public schools because it violates the Establishment Clause. The Establishment Clause prohibits the government from favoring one religion over another or promoting religious beliefs. By prohibiting the teaching of evolution, a state would be promoting a specific religious belief (such as creationism) over others, which goes against the principles of religious freedom and separation of church and state. Therefore, the statement is true.Rate this question:
-
- 7.
The Constitution reserves to the states the power to
-
Make treaties.
-
Provide for law and order.
-
Wage war.
-
Do anything that is “necessary and proper.”
Correct Answer
A. Provide for law and order.Explanation
The Constitution reserves to the states the power to provide for law and order. This means that the responsibility of maintaining peace, enforcing laws, and ensuring public safety lies with the individual states. This division of power between the federal government and the states is a key principle of federalism in the United States. It allows states to have autonomy in managing their own law enforcement agencies and criminal justice systems, while the federal government focuses on broader national issues.Rate this question:
-
- 8.
Which of the following is true with regard to obscenity and the law?
-
Obscenity is not protected by the 1st Amendment.
-
Obscenity is fully protected by the 1st Amendment.
-
Child pornography is protected by the 1st Amendment.
-
Obscenity is protected under the 19th Amendment.
Correct Answer
A. Obscenity is not protected by the 1st Amendment.Explanation
Obscenity is not protected by the 1st Amendment because the 1st Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees the right to freedom of speech, but it does not protect obscenity. The Supreme Court has established a three-part test to determine whether material is obscene, known as the Miller test. This test considers whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find the material appeals to the prurient interest, whether it depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive way, and whether it lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. If material meets these criteria, it is considered obscene and is not protected by the 1st Amendment.Rate this question:
-
- 9.
In Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), the Supreme Court struck down a state law that prohibited blacks from riding on trains in the same passenger cars as whites.
-
True
-
False
Correct Answer
A. FalseExplanation
In Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), the Supreme Court upheld a state law that allowed racial segregation in public facilities, including trains. The court's decision established the "separate but equal" doctrine, which permitted racial segregation as long as the facilities were deemed equal. This decision had a significant impact on the civil rights movement and was eventually overturned by the Supreme Court in Brown v. Board of Education (1954). Therefore, the statement that the Supreme Court struck down a state law prohibiting blacks from riding on trains in the same passenger cars as whites is false.Rate this question:
-
- 10.
Devolution is
-
The passing of authority from the national government to the states.
-
The expansion of national authority that began in the 1930s.
-
The expansion of national authority that began in the 1960s.
-
The passing of authority from states to the federal government.
Correct Answer
A. The passing of authority from the national government to the states.Explanation
Devolution refers to the transfer of power and authority from a central or national government to regional or state governments. This process involves decentralizing decision-making and giving states more autonomy in governing their own affairs. It is a mechanism that aims to promote local control and responsiveness, allowing states to address their specific needs and preferences. This answer accurately describes the concept of devolution by highlighting the passing of authority from the national government to the states.Rate this question:
-
- 11.
A city can, consistent with the 1st Amendment, deny a demonstration permit to members of the American Nazi Party who want to march in a Jewish community, because the message of the Nazis is abhorrent and hurtful to that community.
-
True
-
False
Correct Answer
A. FalseExplanation
The 1st Amendment of the United States Constitution protects the right to freedom of speech, including the right to express unpopular or offensive views. Denying a demonstration permit based on the content of the message would be considered a violation of the 1st Amendment. While the message of the American Nazi Party may be abhorrent and hurtful, it is still protected under the Constitution. Therefore, the correct answer is false.Rate this question:
-
- 12.
While the death penalty is not per se unconstitutional, it has been struck down
-
As a punishment for the mentally retarded.
-
As a punishment for juvenile offenders.
-
Where there were great racial disparities in the imposition of the penalty.
-
All of the above
Correct Answer
A. All of the aboveExplanation
The correct answer is "all of the above." The death penalty has been deemed unconstitutional as a punishment for the mentally retarded, as it violates the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. It has also been struck down as a punishment for juvenile offenders, as it violates the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of equal protection. Additionally, if there are significant racial disparities in the imposition of the death penalty, it can be considered a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. Therefore, all of these reasons have led to the death penalty being deemed unconstitutional in certain cases.Rate this question:
-
- 13.
According to the Supreme Court, prayer in public schools violates
-
The Free Exercise Clause.
-
The Establishment Clause.
-
The Exclusionary Rule.
-
Due process.
Correct Answer
A. The Establishment Clause.Explanation
The Establishment Clause is the correct answer because it prohibits the government from establishing or endorsing a particular religion. Prayer in public schools can be seen as a form of government endorsement of religion, which violates the Establishment Clause. The Supreme Court has consistently ruled that prayer in public schools is unconstitutional because it goes against the principle of separation of church and state. This clause ensures that the government remains neutral towards religion and does not favor or promote any particular faith.Rate this question:
-
- 14.
In general, conservative Supreme Court Justices tend to give greater protection to civil liberties, while liberal Justices give greater deference to the will of the majority reflected in legislative enactments.
-
True
-
False
Correct Answer
A. FalseExplanation
Conservative Supreme Court Justices typically prioritize the will of the majority reflected in legislative enactments, while liberal Justices tend to provide greater protection to civil liberties. This means that the given statement is incorrect, as it suggests the opposite.Rate this question:
-
- 15.
The absorption of certain provisions of the Bill of Rights into the 14th Amendment so that these rights are protected from infringement by the states is called
-
The preferred position doctrine.
-
Selective incorporation.
-
The absorption doctrine.
-
Procedural change.
Correct Answer
A. Selective incorporation.Explanation
Selective incorporation refers to the process by which certain provisions of the Bill of Rights are applied to the states through the 14th Amendment's Due Process Clause. This means that the rights protected by the Bill of Rights, which originally only applied to the federal government, are now also protected from infringement by the states. The preferred position doctrine, absorption doctrine, and procedural change are not accurate terms to describe this process.Rate this question:
-
- 16.
In Korematsu v. United States (1994), the Supreme Court upheld the forced evacuation of Japanese Americans from California coastal areas on the ground that
-
The Equal Protection Clause does not apply to discrimination against people of Japanese ancestry.
-
The government’s national security interest outweighed the civil rights and civil liberties of the Japanese Americans.
-
The government’s action did not constitute government-sponsored racial discrimination.
-
None of the above.
Correct Answer
A. The government’s national security interest outweighed the civil rights and civil liberties of the Japanese Americans.Explanation
The correct answer is that the government's national security interest outweighed the civil rights and civil liberties of the Japanese Americans. This means that the Supreme Court believed that protecting the country's security was more important than protecting the rights and liberties of a specific group of people. This decision allowed for the forced evacuation and internment of Japanese Americans during World War II, despite the fact that it violated their constitutional rights.Rate this question:
-
- 17.
A state university can, consistent with the Fourteenth Amendment, employ an admission program that uses racial quotas as a means of ensuring that certain percentages of admitted students will be from minority groups.
-
True
-
False
Correct Answer
A. FalseExplanation
The explanation for the given correct answer (False) is that the use of racial quotas in university admissions is not consistent with the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. The Fourteenth Amendment guarantees equal protection under the law and prohibits discrimination based on race. Therefore, employing an admission program that uses racial quotas would be considered unconstitutional.Rate this question:
-
- 18.
The Framers adopted a system of government known as federalism because they believed that such a system
-
Would be more efficient than a unitary system of government.
-
Would preserve greater sovereignty for the states than would a confederacy.
-
Would accommodate both a strong national government and already existing sovereign states.
-
Would be more democratic than any other system of government.
Correct Answer
A. Would accommodate both a strong national government and already existing sovereign states.Explanation
The Framers believed that adopting a system of federalism would allow for a strong national government while also respecting the sovereignty of individual states. This system would strike a balance between centralization and decentralization of power, ensuring that the national government could effectively govern the entire country while also allowing states to retain some level of autonomy. By accommodating both a strong national government and already existing sovereign states, federalism would provide a framework for effective governance and prevent the concentration of power in a single entity.Rate this question:
-
- 19.
The 10th Amendment addressed the concerns of Anti-Federalists about
-
Individual freedoms.
-
The meaning of the Commerce Clause.
-
Popular representation in Congress.
-
The powers of state governments.
Correct Answer
A. The powers of state governments.Explanation
The 10th Amendment to the United States Constitution specifically addresses the concerns of the Anti-Federalists regarding the powers of state governments. The Anti-Federalists were worried that the newly proposed Constitution would give too much power to the federal government and undermine the authority of the states. The 10th Amendment was added to ensure that any powers not delegated to the federal government would be reserved for the states. This amendment was intended to protect the autonomy and sovereignty of the states, addressing the concerns raised by the Anti-Federalists.Rate this question:
-
- 20.
A public policy program that is jointly funded and jointly administered by both the federal government and states is an example of
-
Dual federalism.
-
Cooperative federalism.
-
Unitary federalism.
-
Confederate federalism.
Correct Answer
A. Cooperative federalism.Explanation
A public policy program that is funded and administered by both the federal government and states exemplifies cooperative federalism. In this system, the federal and state governments work together to address policy issues and share responsibilities. This approach promotes collaboration and cooperation between the different levels of government, allowing for the efficient implementation of policies and the sharing of resources and expertise.Rate this question:
-
- 21.
In Brown v. Board of Education (1954), the Supreme Court held that racial segregation in public schools violated the
-
5th Amendment Due Process Clause.
-
14th Amendment Due Process Clause.
-
14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause.
-
Civil Rights Act.
Correct Answer
A. 14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause.Explanation
In Brown v. Board of Education (1954), the Supreme Court ruled that racial segregation in public schools was unconstitutional. The court held that the "separate but equal" doctrine, which allowed for racial segregation as long as the facilities were equal, was inherently unequal and violated the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. This clause states that no state shall deny any person within its jurisdiction equal protection of the laws. By ruling that segregation violated this clause, the court set an important precedent for desegregation and equal rights in the United States.Rate this question:
-
- 22.
Like all other rights, the freedom of speech is
-
Defined in precise terms in the Bill of Rights.
-
Not absolute.
-
Fully respected by public officials.
-
Protected from action by federal officials but not state officials.
Correct Answer
A. Not absolute.Explanation
The correct answer is "not absolute." The explanation for this is that while the freedom of speech is indeed defined in the Bill of Rights, it is not an unlimited right. There are certain limitations and restrictions placed on freedom of speech, such as speech that incites violence, poses a threat to national security, or defames someone's character. These limitations ensure that the exercise of free speech does not infringe upon the rights and safety of others. Therefore, the freedom of speech is not absolute and can be regulated under certain circumstances.Rate this question:
-
- 23.
The Voting Rights Act was enacted by Congress under its power to enforce the ___ Amendment.
-
13th
-
14th
-
15th
-
16th
Correct Answer
A. 15thExplanation
The Voting Rights Act was enacted by Congress under its power to enforce the 15th Amendment. The 15th Amendment, ratified in 1870, prohibits the denial of the right to vote based on race, color, or previous condition of servitude. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 was a landmark piece of legislation that aimed to overcome barriers to voting faced by African Americans, particularly in the southern states, by providing federal oversight of elections and outlawing discriminatory voting practices.Rate this question:
-
- 24.
In the U.S., the relationship between the federal government and the states is a hierarchical one in which the federal government has authority over the states and directs the state to carry out federal policies.
-
True
-
False
Correct Answer
A. FalseExplanation
The explanation for the answer being False is that the relationship between the federal government and the states in the U.S. is not hierarchical, but rather one of shared powers and cooperation. The U.S. Constitution establishes a system of federalism, where power is divided between the federal government and the states, with each having their own areas of authority. The federal government cannot simply direct the states to carry out federal policies, but instead must work with them through cooperation and negotiation.Rate this question:
-
- 25.
In 1935 and 1936, a conservative Supreme Court took a very broad view of federal power and upheld a number of President Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal programs as constitutional.
-
True
-
False
Correct Answer
A. FalseExplanation
The statement is false because in 1935 and 1936, the Supreme Court actually took a narrow view of federal power and struck down several of President Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal programs as unconstitutional. This period is known as the "switch in time that saved nine" because one justice, Owen Roberts, began to change his voting pattern to support the New Deal programs, which eventually led to a shift in the Court's stance on federal power.Rate this question:
-
- 26.
In Roe v. Wade (1973), the Supreme Court identified the constitutional basis for the right of privacy as
-
The 9th Amendment.
-
The 14th Amendment.
-
The 14th Amendment Due Process Clause.
-
The 14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause.
Correct Answer
A. The 14th Amendment Due Process Clause.Explanation
The Supreme Court identified the constitutional basis for the right of privacy as the 14th Amendment Due Process Clause. This clause states that no state shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. The Court interpreted this clause to include a right to privacy, which encompasses a woman's decision to have an abortion. This landmark decision in Roe v. Wade established a woman's constitutional right to choose to have an abortion.Rate this question:
-
- 27.
The strict scrutiny test applies to laws that use certain suspect classifications. To defend such a law, the government must show
-
That the law serves a legitimate government interest and that use of classification is reasonably related to achieving that interest.
-
That the law serves an important government interest and that the use of the classification is substantially related to achieving that interest.
-
That the law serves a compelling government interest and that the use of the classification is narrowly tailored to achieving that interest.
-
None of the above
Correct Answer
A. That the law serves a compelling government interest and that the use of the classification is narrowly tailored to achieving that interest.Explanation
The strict scrutiny test is a standard used by courts to determine the constitutionality of laws that involve suspect classifications, such as race or religion. According to this test, the government must meet two requirements to defend such a law. First, the law must serve a compelling government interest, meaning it must be of utmost importance. Second, the use of classification must be narrowly tailored to achieving that interest, meaning it must be necessary and the least restrictive means to achieve the government's goal. This answer accurately reflects these requirements and is therefore the correct choice.Rate this question:
-
- 28.
In Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), a Ku Klux Klan leader had been convicted under a law that made it a crime to advocate the violent overthrow of the government. He had assembled a group for a cross burning and given a speech in which he said that revenge might have to be taken if the U.S. continues to suppress the white race. The Supreme Court upheld his conviction because his speech constituted a “clear and present danger.”
-
True
-
False
Correct Answer
A. FalseExplanation
The correct answer is False. The Supreme Court did not uphold the conviction in Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969). In this case, the Court established the "incitement to imminent lawless action" test, stating that speech can only be restricted if it is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action. The Court found that the KKK leader's speech did not meet this standard, as it did not advocate for immediate violence or lawlessness. Therefore, his conviction was overturned.Rate this question:
-
- 29.
The Equal Protection Clause forbids private-sector employers from discriminating against employees and job applicants on the basis of race, sex, and ethnicity.
-
True
-
False
Correct Answer
A. FalseExplanation
The Equal Protection Clause only applies to state actors, such as government entities, and does not directly apply to private-sector employers. Private employers are generally governed by other anti-discrimination laws, such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, sex, and ethnicity in employment. Therefore, the statement that the Equal Protection Clause forbids private-sector employers from discriminating on these grounds is false.Rate this question:
-
- 30.
In cases involving state-sponsored discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, or sex, the Supreme Court applies the strict scrutiny test.
-
True
-
False
Correct Answer
A. FalseExplanation
In cases involving state-sponsored discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, or sex, the Supreme Court does not apply the strict scrutiny test. Instead, it applies the intermediate scrutiny test. This test requires the government to show that the discriminatory policy serves an important government interest and is substantially related to achieving that interest. The strict scrutiny test is reserved for cases involving discrimination based on a suspect classification, such as race, where the government must show that the discriminatory policy is necessary to achieve a compelling government interest. Therefore, the statement is false.Rate this question:
-
Quiz Review Timeline (Updated): Mar 21, 2023 +
Our quizzes are rigorously reviewed, monitored and continuously updated by our expert board to maintain accuracy, relevance, and timeliness.
-
Current Version
-
Mar 21, 2023Quiz Edited by
ProProfs Editorial Team -
May 17, 2011Quiz Created by
Co350515
Back to top