CON Law Exam On Religion, Establishment Clause, And Free Exercise
-
In what case did Justice O'Connor establish her "Perceived Endorsement Test"?
This exam covers key Supreme Court cases related to the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise, focusing on significant decisions and legal tests.
(24).webp "CON Law Exam On Religion, Establishment Clause, And Free Exercise - Quiz")
Quiz Preview
- 2.
Which case dealt with a 7th day Adventist's refusal to work on saturdays and her subsequent denial of unemployment compensation?
Explanation
Sherbert v. Verner was a landmark case that dealt with the refusal of a 7th day Adventist to work on Saturdays and her subsequent denial of unemployment compensation. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the 7th day Adventist, stating that the denial of unemployment benefits violated her First Amendment right to free exercise of religion. The case established the Sherbert Test, which set a high standard for the government to justify any infringement on an individual's religious freedom.Rate this question:
- 3.
What is significant about Boerne v. Flores?
-
Declared the display of nativity scenes to be unconstitutional
-
Declared that congress exceeded its 14th amend. enforcement powers by enacting RFRA and, in effect, telling supreme court how to interpret it
-
Declared that reimbursement of parents who send kids to parochial schools is okay
-
Declared use of illegal drugs, even for religious purposes, is not allowed
Correct Answer
A. Declared that congress exceeded its 14th amend. enforcement powers by enacting RFRA and, in effect, telling supreme court how to interpret itExplanation
Boerne v. Flores is significant because it declared that Congress exceeded its 14th amendment enforcement powers by enacting RFRA (Religious Freedom Restoration Act) and effectively telling the Supreme Court how to interpret it. This decision limited Congress's ability to expand the scope of constitutional rights and highlighted the importance of separation of powers between the legislative and judicial branches of government.Rate this question:
-
- 4.
What did the Edwards V. Aguillard case decide?
-
That the Balanced Treatment for Creation-Science and Evolution-science act violated Establishment Clause
-
That the supplementation of salaries for teachers of secular subjects in religious schools violates separation of church and state
-
That the requirement for the Amish to send kids to high school would "gravely endanger" the free exercise of their faith
Correct Answer
A. That the Balanced Treatment for Creation-Science and Evolution-science act violated Establishment ClauseExplanation
The Edwards v. Aguillard case decided that the Balanced Treatment for Creation-Science and Evolution-science act violated the Establishment Clause. This means that the act, which required public schools to teach creationism alongside evolution, was found to be unconstitutional because it promoted a specific religious viewpoint. The court ruled that the government should not favor one religion over another or promote religious beliefs in public education.Rate this question:
-
- 5.
What case deals with compulsory flag saluting and freedom of speech?
-
Engle V. Vitale
-
Lee V. Weisman
-
Davis V. Beason
-
W. Virginia V. Barnette
Correct Answer
A. W. Virginia V. BarnetteExplanation
W. Virginia V. Barnette is the correct answer because it deals with compulsory flag saluting and freedom of speech. In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that forcing students to salute the flag and recite the Pledge of Allegiance violated their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and religion. The Court held that individuals have the right to express their beliefs and cannot be compelled to engage in patriotic acts against their will. This landmark case established that the government cannot require individuals to participate in patriotic rituals if it goes against their sincerely held beliefs.Rate this question:
-
- 6.
Which case dealt with state officials composing a non-denominational, voluntary prayer to be said in school?
Correct Answer
Explanation
The case that dealt with state officials composing a non-denominational, voluntary prayer to be said in school is Engel v. Vitale. In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that the prayer violated the First Amendment's Establishment Clause, which prohibits the government from establishing or promoting a religion. The Court concluded that the state's involvement in composing and encouraging the prayer was a violation of the separation of church and state.Rate this question:
- 7.
Which case does Allegeheny City V. Greater Pitts ACLU hold significance for?
Correct Answer
Lynch V. DonnellyExplanation
Allegeheny City V. Greater Pitts ACLU holds significance for the case Lynch V. Donnelly.Rate this question:
- 8.
Why was Zelman V. Simmons-Harris significant?
-
It developed a three pronged test to determine whether or not a law violates the establishment clause
-
It established a 5 part test outlining the requirements of voucher programs
-
It offered a simpler test dealing strictly with government's endorsement or perceived endorsement of a particular religion
Correct Answer
A. It established a 5 part test outlining the requirements of voucher programsExplanation
Zelman v. Simmons-Harris was significant because it established a 5 part test outlining the requirements of voucher programs. This means that the case provided a clear framework for evaluating the constitutionality of government-funded voucher programs, which provide financial assistance for students to attend private schools, including religious institutions. The 5 part test likely outlines criteria such as whether the program has a secular purpose, whether it primarily advances or inhibits religion, and whether it creates excessive entanglement between government and religion.Rate this question:
-
- 9.
What three requirements must a law meet in order to pass the lemon test?
Correct Answer
must have secular purpose, neither advancing nor harming religion (neutral), no excessive entanglement
neither advancing nor harming religion, must have secular purpose, no excessive entanglement
no excessive entanglement, must have secular purpose, neither advancing nor harming religion (neutral)Explanation
The lemon test is a legal principle used by the Supreme Court to determine if a law violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. According to the lemon test, a law must meet three requirements in order to pass. These requirements are: 1) the law must have a secular purpose, meaning it cannot have a religious motive; 2) the law must neither advance nor harm religion, meaning it cannot favor or discriminate against any particular religion; and 3) the law must not result in excessive entanglement between government and religion. The correct answer states these requirements in the correct order.Rate this question:
- 10.
What are the two issues in the Good News Club V. Milford Central School case?
Correct Answer
did Milford violate 1st amendment free speech rights of the club in excluding it? if a violation occurred, was it justified by Milford's concern that permitting the club's activities would violate the establishment clause?
if a violation occurred, was it justified by Milford's concern that permitting the club's activities would violate the establishment clause? did Milford violate 1st amendment free speech rights of the club in excluding it?Explanation
The correct answer suggests that there are two issues in the Good News Club v. Milford Central School case. The first issue is whether Milford violated the club's 1st amendment free speech rights by excluding it. The second issue is whether, if a violation occurred, it was justified by Milford's concern that permitting the club's activities would violate the establishment clause.Rate this question:
Quiz Review Timeline (Updated): Dec 11, 2023 +
Our quizzes are rigorously reviewed, monitored and continuously updated by our expert board to maintain accuracy, relevance, and timeliness.
-
Current Version
-
Dec 11, 2023Quiz Edited by
ProProfs Editorial Team -
Oct 27, 2008Quiz Created by
Peskinj
Back to top