Chapter 5 - Civil Liberties Quiz #1

Approved & Edited by ProProfs Editorial Team

The editorial team at ProProfs Quizzes consists of a select group of subject experts, trivia writers, and quiz masters who have authored over 10,000 quizzes taken by more than 100 million users. This team includes our in-house seasoned quiz moderators and subject matter experts. Our editorial experts, spread across the world, are rigorously trained using our comprehensive guidelines to ensure that you receive the highest quality quizzes.

Learn about Our Editorial Process

| By Catherine Halcomb

Catherine Halcomb

Community Contributor

Quizzes Created: 1518 | Total Attempts: 5,459,314

Questions: 10 | Attempts: 193 | Updated: Mar 22, 2023

Questions

Settings

Create your own Quiz

Questions and Answers

1.

Civil Liberties are
- A.
  
  The protections the Constitution provides against the abuse of government.
- B.
  
  The protecting of certain groups, such as women, gays, and African Americans.
- C.
  
  Free speech, free press, religious freedoms, and the rights of the accused.
- D.
  
  Both A and B are true.
- E.
  
  Both A and C are true.
Correct Answer
E. Both A and C are true.

Explanation
Civil liberties refer to the protections provided by the Constitution against government abuse. This includes safeguarding the rights of individuals and groups, such as women, gays, and African Americans. Additionally, civil liberties encompass free speech, free press, religious freedoms, and the rights of the accused. Both options A and C accurately describe civil liberties, making the answer "Both A and C are true."

Rate this question:
2.

Usually, the Supreme Court has reacted to wartime curtailments of civil liberties by
- A.
  
  Upholding them.
- B.
  
  Rejecting them.
- C.
  
  Upholding them at first, limiting them later.
- D.
  
  Rejecting them at first, reinstating them later.
- E.
  
  Avoiding rulings on constitutionality and consigning such issues to the lower federal courts.
Correct Answer
A. Upholding them.

Explanation
During times of war, the Supreme Court has typically supported and upheld curtailments of civil liberties. This suggests that the Court believes that the government's actions in restricting civil liberties are justified and necessary for the security and well-being of the nation during wartime. By upholding these curtailments, the Court acknowledges the importance of balancing individual rights with national security interests.

Rate this question:
3.

The Bill of Rights has come to apply to the states through the interpretation of
- A.
  
  The Fourteenth Amendment.
- B.
  
  The Tenth Amendment.
- C.
  
  The commerce clause.
- D.
  
  Article III.
- E.
  
  The necessary and proper clause.
- F.
  
  The necessary and proper clause.
Correct Answer
A. The Fourteenth Amendment.

Explanation
The correct answer is the Fourteenth Amendment. The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was ratified in 1868 and includes the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses. These clauses have been interpreted by the courts to apply the protections of the Bill of Rights to the states, ensuring that state governments cannot infringe upon individual rights. This interpretation has been a significant development in constitutional law, extending the reach and impact of the Bill of Rights beyond just the federal government.

Rate this question:
4.

The earliest incorporations of portions of the Bill of Rights relied on
- A.
  
  The notion of a reasonable person.
- B.
  
  The shock-the-conscience test.
- C.
  
  A national basis standard.
- D.
  
  The due process and equal protection clauses.
- E.
  
  The notions of ordered liberty and fundamental rights.
Correct Answer
D. The due process and equal protection clauses.

Explanation
The correct answer is the due process and equal protection clauses. The Bill of Rights was initially applied to the federal government only, but through the due process and equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, these rights were incorporated and made applicable to the states as well. The due process clause ensures that individuals are protected from arbitrary government action, while the equal protection clause guarantees that all individuals are treated equally under the law. These clauses have been crucial in extending the protections of the Bill of Rights to all citizens.

Rate this question:
5.

In this Supreme Court decision, the Court held that the federal guarantees of free speech and free press also applied to the states.
- A.
  
  Marbury
- B.
  
  Barron
- C.
  
  Gitlow
- D.
  
  McDonald
- E.
  
  Heller
Correct Answer
C. Gitlow

Explanation
The Supreme Court decision in Gitlow held that the federal guarantees of free speech and free press also applied to the states. This means that the protections provided by the First Amendment, which guarantees freedom of speech and of the press, are not only applicable to the federal government but also to the state governments. This decision expanded the scope of free speech and press rights, ensuring that individuals have these fundamental freedoms protected at both the federal and state levels.

Rate this question:
6.

Which term best describes the manner in which the Supreme Court has applied the Bill of Rights to the states?
- A.
  
  Incorporation
- B.
  
  Selective incorporation
- C.
  
  Complete incorporation
- D.
  
  Consecutive incorporation
- E.
  
  Minimal incorporation
Correct Answer
B. Selective incorporation

Explanation
Selective incorporation is the best term to describe the manner in which the Supreme Court has applied the Bill of Rights to the states. This refers to the process by which the Court has selectively applied certain provisions of the Bill of Rights to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. It means that not all provisions of the Bill of Rights are automatically applied to the states, but rather the Court has gradually incorporated them over time based on their importance and fundamental nature. This approach allows for a balance between protecting individual rights and preserving state sovereignty.

Rate this question:
7.

Writing for the Supreme Court, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes proclaimed that the Congress could punish dangerous speech when that speech
- A.
  
  Represented a "clear and present danger" to the United States.
- B.
  
  Incited citizens to commit a lawless action.
- C.
  
  Was false.
- D.
  
  Options A,B and C are true.
- E.
  
  None of the above is true.
Correct Answer
A. Represented a "clear and present danger" to the United States.

Explanation
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes proclaimed that the Congress could punish dangerous speech when that speech represented a "clear and present danger" to the United States. This means that if the speech poses an immediate threat to the safety or security of the country, Congress has the authority to take action against it. This standard allows for the restriction of speech that could potentially lead to harm or violence, even if it does not directly incite citizens to commit a lawless action or if it is false. Therefore, option A is the correct answer.

Rate this question:
8.

Slander differs from libel in that it refers to
- A.
  
  Oral statements.
- B.
  
  Written statements.
- C.
  
  Public officials.
- D.
  
  Private individuals.
- E.
  
  Administrative hierarchies.
Correct Answer
A. Oral statements.

Explanation
Slander refers to oral statements, whereas libel refers to written statements. Slander involves making false spoken statements about someone that can harm their reputation. On the other hand, libel involves making false written statements that can harm someone's reputation. Therefore, the correct answer is oral statements.

Rate this question:
9.

The "clear and present danger" test emerged in the Supreme Court's decision in the case of
- A.
  
  Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire.
- B.
  
  Miller v. California.
- C.
  
  Texas v. Johnson.
- D.
  
  Reno v. ACLU.
- E.
  
  Schenck v. United States.
Correct Answer
E. Schenck v. United States.

Explanation
The "clear and present danger" test emerged in the Supreme Court's decision in the case of Schenck v. United States. This case involved the conviction of Charles Schenck, a socialist who distributed pamphlets urging men to resist the draft during World War I. The Supreme Court ruled that Schenck's actions were not protected by the First Amendment because they presented a "clear and present danger" to the government's ability to conduct the war effort. This case established the precedent that speech can be restricted if it poses a clear and present danger to national security or public safety.

Rate this question:
10.

The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of flag burning in the case of
- A.
  
  Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire.
- B.
  
  Miller v. California.
- C.
  
  Texas v. Johnson.
- D.
  
  Reno v. Johnson.
- E.
  
  Schenck v. United States.
Correct Answer
C. Texas v. Johnson.

Explanation
In the case of Texas v. Johnson, the Supreme Court ruled that flag burning is protected under the First Amendment as a form of symbolic speech. The case involved Gregory Lee Johnson, who burned an American flag during a protest at the 1984 Republican National Convention. The Court determined that flag burning was a form of expression and therefore protected by the Constitution, even if it was offensive or disrespectful to some. This landmark decision established that the government cannot prohibit the desecration of the American flag as it would violate the right to freedom of speech.

Rate this question:

Chapter 5 - Civil Liberties Quiz #1

Civil Liberties are

Usually, the Supreme Court has reacted to wartime curtailments of civil liberties by

The Bill of Rights has come to apply to the states through the interpretation of

The earliest incorporations of portions of the Bill of Rights relied on

In this Supreme Court decision, the Court held that the federal guarantees of free speech and free press also applied to the states.

Which term best describes the manner in which the Supreme Court has applied the Bill of Rights to the states?

Writing for the Supreme Court, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes proclaimed that the Congress could punish dangerous speech when that speech

Slander differs from libel in that it refers to

The "clear and present danger" test emerged in the Supreme Court's decision in the case of

The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of flag burning in the case of