People's Rights, And Law And Order Quiz
-
1. Employers can defend themselves against a charge of discrimination by arguing that:
-
They have a right to do anything they want since it is their business anyway.
-
Race, sex, or some other characteristic is relevant to the job.
-
There are bona fide occupational qualifications.
-
Band C.
-
All of these
-
Embark on a journey through the legal landscape with the People's Rights, Law, and Order Quiz. This quiz is designed to test your knowledge of fundamental rights, legal principles, and the intricacies of law and order. Explore questions that delve into the core concepts of justice, individual rights, and the functioning of legal systems.
Challenge yourself to navigate through scenarios See morethat require an understanding of the delicate balance between maintaining law and upholding the rights of individuals. Whether you're a legal enthusiast or simply curious about the foundations of a just society, this quiz offers an engaging exploration into the realms of people's rights, law, and order. Sharpen your legal acumen and discover how well-versed you are in the principles that govern our societies.
Quiz Preview
- 2.
2. The explicit exclusion of members of a protected class is which of the following?
-
Disparate treatment
-
. Disparate impact
-
Both A and B
-
Neither A nor B Neither A nor B Neither A nor B
Correct Answer
A. Disparate treatmentExplanation
The correct answer is "Neither A nor B". This means that the explicit exclusion of members of a protected class is not considered either disparate treatment or disparate impact. Disparate treatment refers to intentionally treating individuals differently based on their protected characteristics, while disparate impact refers to policies or practices that may have a disproportionately negative effect on members of a protected class, even if there is no intent to discriminate. In this case, the explicit exclusion does not fall under either category.Rate this question:
-
- 3.
3. Unequal treatment that results not from explicit exclusion from practices that still serve to exclude members of a protected class disproportionately is which of the following?
-
Disparate treatment
-
Disparate impact
-
Both A and B
-
Neither A nor B
Correct Answer
A. Disparate impactExplanation
Disparate impact refers to unequal treatment that occurs unintentionally, as a result of practices that may seem neutral but still have a disproportionately negative impact on members of a protected class. In this case, the unequal treatment does not come from explicit exclusion, but rather from practices that indirectly exclude certain individuals. Therefore, the correct answer is disparate impact.Rate this question:
-
- 4.
4. A policy that has disparate impact is permissible if the qualification is:
-
A matter of corporate policy.
-
Substantially related to successful performance.
-
The whim of the employer.
-
Never allowed because the policy would be discriminatory.
-
None of these.
Correct Answer
A. Substantially related to successful performance.Explanation
A policy that has disparate impact means that it disproportionately affects a certain group of people based on a protected characteristic, such as race or gender. In order for this policy to be permissible, it must be substantially related to successful performance. This means that the policy must have a clear and direct connection to the job requirements and the ability to perform the job effectively. If the qualification is arbitrary or based solely on the employer's preference, it would not be permissible as it would be discriminatory. Therefore, the correct answer is "Substantially related to successful performance."Rate this question:
-
- 5.
5. Sex discrimination under Title VII is defined as discrimination based on
-
Whether the person is heterosexual or homosexual.
-
. Whether the person is male or female.
-
Both A and B
-
Neither A nor B.
Correct Answer
A. . Whether the person is male or female.Explanation
Sex discrimination under Title VII is defined as discrimination based on whether the person is male or female. This means that it is illegal to treat individuals differently or unfairly in the workplace based on their gender. This includes discrimination against both men and women, and it does not matter whether the person is heterosexual or homosexual. The focus is solely on the person's sex or gender identity. Therefore, the correct answer is whether the person is male or female.Rate this question:
-
- 6.
6. “Discrimination is wrong because it creates an economically inefficient matching of people to jobs” is an example of which ethical argument against discrimination?
-
The arguments based on justice
-
The Kantian arguments
-
The utilitarian argument
-
All of these
-
None of these
Correct Answer
A. The utilitarian argumentExplanation
This statement is an example of the utilitarian argument against discrimination. Utilitarianism is a consequentialist ethical theory that focuses on maximizing overall happiness or utility. In this case, the argument suggests that discrimination is wrong because it leads to an economically inefficient matching of people to jobs. By discriminating against certain individuals based on irrelevant factors such as race or gender, society is not making the most efficient use of available human resources, which goes against the utilitarian goal of maximizing overall well-being.Rate this question:
-
- 7.
7. “Discrimination is wrong because it deprives people of their fundamental right to be treated with dignity and respect as fully developed human beings” is an example of which ethical argument against discrimination?
-
The arguments based on justice
-
The Kantian arguments
-
The utilitarian argument
-
All of these
-
None of these None of these None of these
Correct Answer
A. The Kantian argumentsExplanation
The given statement is an example of the Kantian argument against discrimination because it emphasizes the importance of treating individuals with dignity and respect. Kantian ethics is based on the principle of treating individuals as ends in themselves, rather than as means to an end. Discrimination goes against this principle as it treats certain individuals as lesser or inferior, thereby violating their fundamental rights.Rate this question:
-
- 8.
8. “Discrimination is unjust according to the principle of proportionate equality because characteristics such as race and sex are generally irrelevant to the performance of a job” is an example of which ethical argument against discrimination?
-
The arguments based on justice
-
The Kantian arguments
-
The utilitarian argument
-
All of these
-
None of these
Correct Answer
A. The arguments based on justiceExplanation
This statement is an example of an argument based on justice against discrimination. It suggests that discrimination is unjust because characteristics such as race and sex are generally irrelevant to job performance. This argument is rooted in the principle of proportionate equality, which states that individuals should be treated equally unless there is a justifiable reason to treat them differently. Discrimination based on irrelevant characteristics violates this principle and is therefore considered unjust.Rate this question:
-
- 9.
9. “Discrimination is wrong because it denies individuals the important human good of opportunity for self-development” is an example of which ethical argument against discrimination?
-
. The arguments based on justice
-
The Kantian arguments
-
The utilitarian argument
-
All of these
-
. None of these
Correct Answer
A. . The arguments based on justiceExplanation
This statement is an example of an ethical argument based on justice against discrimination. It states that discrimination is wrong because it denies individuals the opportunity for self-development, which is an important human good. This argument is rooted in the principle of justice, which emphasizes fairness and equal treatment for all individuals. By denying someone the opportunity for self-development, discrimination goes against the principles of justice and is therefore considered morally wrong.Rate this question:
-
- 10.
10. Which of the following are permissible affirmative action plans, as determined by the Supreme Court?
-
The Compensation argument
-
Equality arguments
-
. Utilitarian arguments
-
All of these
-
None of these
Correct Answer
A. All of theseExplanation
The Supreme Court has determined that all of the given arguments - Compensation, Equality, and Utilitarian - are permissible affirmative action plans. This means that these arguments can be used as justifications for implementing affirmative action policies.Rate this question:
-
- 11.
11. According to the equality arguments favoring affirmative action, affirmative action is justified for which of the following reasons?
-
Because of past discrimination, victims of discrimination are owed preferential treatment
-
Affirmative action is justified because it provides equality of opportunity.
-
Affirmative action is justified because it provides equality of treatment.
-
. Both B and C.
-
Affirmative action is never justified
Correct Answer
A. Affirmative action is justified because it provides equality of treatment.Explanation
According to the given answer, affirmative action is justified because it provides equality of treatment. This means that affirmative action aims to treat individuals equally, regardless of their race or gender, in order to address past discrimination and ensure fairness in opportunities. This perspective argues that affirmative action is necessary to level the playing field and provide equal treatment to all individuals, regardless of their background.Rate this question:
-
- 12.
12. Sexual harassment is mainly an issue of which of the following?
-
. Sex
-
. Drugs
-
Rock and roll
-
Power
-
None of these
Correct Answer
A. PowerExplanation
Sexual harassment is mainly an issue of power because it involves the abuse of power dynamics and control over another person. It is not primarily about sex, drugs, rock and roll, or any of the other options listed. Sexual harassment occurs when someone uses their position of power to engage in unwelcome sexual advances or behavior, creating a hostile or intimidating environment for the victim. This abuse of power can occur in various settings, such as the workplace, educational institutions, or personal relationships.Rate this question:
-
- 13.
13. The hidden costs that are a result of sexual harassment are:
-
Absenteeism.
-
Low morale
-
. Lawsuits
-
A and B.
-
All of these.
Correct Answer
A. All of these.Explanation
The correct answer is "All of these." The hidden costs of sexual harassment include absenteeism, low morale, and lawsuits. Absenteeism occurs when employees feel uncomfortable coming to work due to the hostile environment created by sexual harassment. Low morale is a result of the negative impact on employee well-being and job satisfaction. Lawsuits can arise from victims seeking legal recourse for the harm caused by sexual harassment. Therefore, all of these factors contribute to the hidden costs associated with sexual harassment.Rate this question:
-
- 14.
14. Programs aimed at preventing sexual harassment contain the following elements
-
A policy from high in the organization
-
An effective communication of the policy throughout the organization
-
Well-publicized procedures
-
A and C
-
All of these
Correct Answer
A. All of theseExplanation
The correct answer is "All of these". Programs aimed at preventing sexual harassment should include a policy from high in the organization to establish a clear stance against harassment. Effective communication of the policy throughout the organization ensures that all employees are aware of the expectations and consequences. Well-publicized procedures provide a means for reporting and addressing incidents of harassment. Therefore, all of these elements are necessary for an effective sexual harassment prevention program.Rate this question:
-
- 15.
15. Title VII provides employers with two defenses of charges of sex discrimination. What are they?
-
. Business necessity
-
Bona fide occupational qualification
-
Both A and B
-
Neither A nor B
Correct Answer
A. Both A and BExplanation
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 provides two defenses for employers facing charges of sex discrimination. The first defense is business necessity, which means that the employer can show that the discriminatory practice is necessary for the normal operation of the business. The second defense is bona fide occupational qualification, which allows employers to discriminate based on sex if it is reasonably necessary for the normal operation of the particular job. Both of these defenses can be used by employers to justify their actions and defend against charges of sex discrimination.Rate this question:
-
- 16.
In recent years, the courts have allowed which of the following as an exception to employment at will?
-
Public policy
-
Implied contracts
-
Bad faith and/or malice
-
All of these
-
None of these
Correct Answer
A. Bad faith and/or maliceExplanation
In recent years, courts have recognized bad faith and/or malice as an exception to employment at will. This means that if an employer terminates an employee out of bad faith or with malicious intent, the employee may have legal grounds to challenge the termination. This exception provides some protection to employees against unfair and unjust terminations.Rate this question:
-
- 17.
Which of the following is true of employment at will as a doctrine?
-
Employees can leave at any time, but employers cannot dismiss employees for any reason.
-
Employers can dismiss employees for any reason and employees can leave at any time.
-
Employers can dismiss employees for any reason, but employees can only leave for a cause.
-
Employees can only leave for a cause and employers cannot dismiss employees for any reason.
-
None of these.
Correct Answer
A. Employers can dismiss employees for any reason and employees can leave at any time.Explanation
The correct answer is that employers can dismiss employees for any reason and employees can leave at any time. This is true of employment at will, which is a legal doctrine that allows for the termination of employment by either the employer or the employee without any specific cause or reason. This means that employers have the right to fire employees for any reason, as long as it is not discriminatory or in violation of any employment laws. Similarly, employees have the right to quit their job at any time, without providing a specific cause or reason.Rate this question:
-
- 18.
John Locke claims that people have which of the following?
-
A natural right to property and a property right to their own labor.
-
A natural right to property but no property right to their own labor.
-
A natural right to property but labor is not considered property.
-
A property right to labor, but no natural right to property.
-
All of these
Correct Answer
A. A natural right to property and a property right to their own labor.Explanation
John Locke claims that people have a natural right to property, meaning that they have the inherent right to own and possess property. Additionally, Locke argues that individuals also have a property right to their own labor, meaning that they have the right to use their own labor to acquire and improve property. This means that the correct answer is "A natural right to property and a property right to their own labor."Rate this question:
-
- 19.
4. Which of the following represents Morris Cohen’s view expressed in Property and Sovereignty?
-
The owners of revenue-producing property have power over others, and this has historically constituted political sovereignty.
-
The owners of revenue-producing property have power over others, but this is not considered political sovereignty.
-
The owners of revenue-producing property have political sovereignty over others, and thus have power over them.
-
A and C.
-
None of these.
Correct Answer
A. The owners of revenue-producing property have power over others, and this has historically constituted political sovereignty.Explanation
The correct answer suggests that Morris Cohen's view, as expressed in Property and Sovereignty, is that the owners of revenue-producing property have power over others, and historically, this power has constituted political sovereignty. This means that those who own property that generates income have the ability to exert control and authority over others, and this control has been recognized as a form of political sovereignty throughout history.Rate this question:
-
- 20.
Justice Potter Stewart argued in Perry v. Sindermann that which of the following is true?
-
Property merely consists in ownership of things.
-
Possession of property is 9/10 of the law.
-
Property denotes only a broad range of interests secured by “existing rules or understandings.”
-
Property does not consist merely in ownership of things but denotes a broad range of interests.
-
None of these
Correct Answer
A. Property does not consist merely in ownership of things but denotes a broad range of interests.Explanation
Justice Potter Stewart argued in Perry v. Sindermann that property does not consist merely in ownership of things but denotes a broad range of interests. This means that property includes more than just physical possessions, but also includes various rights and interests that are protected by existing rules or understandings.Rate this question:
-
- 21.
Which of the following may not generally enter into a voluntary contract?
-
. Children
-
The mentally incompetent
-
The inexperienced and/or ignorant
-
Those under duress
-
All of these
Correct Answer
A. All of theseExplanation
All of these options may not generally enter into a voluntary contract because they lack the legal capacity to fully understand the terms and consequences of the contract. Children are not considered legally competent to enter into contracts. The mentally incompetent may lack the mental capacity to understand and make informed decisions about contracts. The inexperienced and/or ignorant may not have the necessary knowledge or understanding to enter into a contract. Those under duress may be coerced or forced into a contract against their will. Therefore, all of these options may not generally enter into a voluntary contract.Rate this question:
-
- 22.
. Which of the following is the main legal protection for American workers?
-
Public policy exceptions to employment at will.
-
Contract law that enforces existing contracts.
-
Contract law that enforces “good faith” standards
-
All of these
-
. None of these
Correct Answer
A. All of theseExplanation
The main legal protection for American workers includes public policy exceptions to employment at will, contract law that enforces existing contracts, and contract law that enforces "good faith" standards. These protections ensure that workers are not unfairly terminated, that their contractual agreements are upheld, and that employers act in good faith towards their employees.Rate this question:
-
- 23.
Which of the following is part of the 1991 Model Employee Termination Act?
-
No employee should be dismissed without due cause.
-
There should be a method of resolving disputes.
-
Companies can hire and fire whomever they wish.
-
A and B
-
None of these.
Correct Answer
A. A and BExplanation
The correct answer is A and B. This means that both options A and B are part of the 1991 Model Employee Termination Act. Option A states that no employee should be dismissed without due cause, which implies that there should be a valid reason for terminating an employee's employment. Option B states that there should be a method of resolving disputes, indicating that there should be a process in place to address any conflicts or disagreements related to employee termination.Rate this question:
-
Quiz Review Timeline (Updated): Dec 4, 2023 +
Our quizzes are rigorously reviewed, monitored and continuously updated by our expert board to maintain accuracy, relevance, and timeliness.
-
Current Version
-
Dec 04, 2023Quiz Edited by
ProProfs Editorial Team -
Jan 23, 2012Quiz Created by
Mejidan
Back to top