Test Your Knowledge About Law

The "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" legal philosophy is based on Hammurabi's Code. Hammurabi's Code was a set of laws created by King Hammurabi of Babylon in ancient Mesopotamia. It was one of the earliest known legal codes and followed the principle of retribution, where the punishment for a crime was equal to the harm caused. This philosophy of punishment influenced many legal systems throughout history, including the concept of "lex talionis" or "law of retaliation."

French Civil Law is based on the Napoleonic Code. The Napoleonic Code, also known as the Civil Code of 1804, was established by Napoleon Bonaparte and enacted in France. It served as a comprehensive legal framework and influenced many civil law systems around the world. The code aimed to unify and simplify the laws of France, providing a clear and accessible legal system. It emphasized equality before the law, protection of individual rights, and the principle of legal certainty. The Napoleonic Code continues to be a fundamental basis for civil law in many countries today.

The abolishment of slavery was first part of the U.S. Constitution in the year 1865. This was the year when the 13th Amendment to the Constitution was ratified, officially ending slavery in the United States. The amendment stated that "neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction." This marked a significant milestone in American history and the fight for equality and freedom.

In the state of Georgia, the legal age to get a tattoo is 18 years old. This means that individuals must be at least 18 years old to legally obtain a tattoo in the state.

In the Marbury versus Madison case, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that it is the duty of the judiciary to interpret the Constitution and determine its validity. This decision established the principle of judicial review, affirming the supremacy of the Constitution over any other laws or actions by the government. The court's decision emphasized the importance of the Constitution as the ultimate authority in the United States, ensuring that all branches of government operate within its limits.

"Draco's Laws" introduced the concept of the state having the exclusive role of punishing individuals accused of crimes. This means that it was the responsibility of the state, rather than individuals or private entities, to carry out punishments for criminal offenses. This concept of state authority in criminal punishment was a significant development in legal systems and helped establish the principle of the state's monopoly on the use of force in administering justice.

United States v. Klein is the correct answer because this constitutional case asserted that Congress does not have the power to limit the jurisdiction of the federal courts. In this case, the Supreme Court held that a law passed by Congress that attempted to dictate the outcome of pending cases violated the separation of powers and was therefore unconstitutional. This decision reaffirmed the independence and authority of the federal judiciary.

The correct answer is 8. The Nuremberg War Crimes Trial had a panel of eight judges. These judges were appointed by the Allied powers and were responsible for hearing the cases against the high-ranking Nazi officials accused of war crimes. The trial took place from 1945 to 1946 and played a significant role in establishing the principles of international law and holding individuals accountable for their actions during times of war.

The correct answer is the 19th Amendment. This amendment to the United States Constitution was ratified in 1920 and granted women the right to vote. Prior to this amendment, women were denied the right to participate in the democratic process and were not allowed to vote in elections. The 19th Amendment was a significant milestone in the fight for gender equality and marked a major step forward in women's rights.

Louisiana is the only state in the U.S. whose laws are not based on English common law. This is because Louisiana follows a civil law system, which is derived from the legal system of France. The state's legal system is based on the Napoleonic Code, which was implemented during the time when Louisiana was a French colony. Unlike the other states, Louisiana's legal system is influenced by French and Spanish civil law traditions rather than English common law.

Pennsylvania Coal Co. v Mahon is the correct answer because this case established the concept of regulatory takings. It stated that if property regulation goes too far and deprives the property owner of all economic value, it becomes an unconstitutional taking under the Fifth Amendment. In this case, the government's regulation prohibiting coal mining in certain areas was deemed to be an unconstitutional taking because it significantly diminished the value of the property without just compensation. This case set an important precedent for determining when property regulations cross the line and become unconstitutional.

Abrams v. United States is the correct answer because this constitutional case established that the government cannot criminalize anti-American speech. In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that the defendants' speech, which criticized American involvement in World War I, was protected under the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech. The court emphasized the importance of allowing dissenting opinions and protecting unpopular speech in a democratic society. Therefore, Abrams v. United States is the relevant case that supports the statement.

Roth v. United States is a landmark Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of obscenity. In this case, the Court established a test to determine whether material is obscene or protected by the First Amendment. The test, known as the Roth test, considers whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find the material to appeal to prurient interests, depict sexual conduct in an offensive way, and lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. This case was significant in shaping the legal framework surrounding obscenity laws in the United States.

Draco's Law was created in Greece. This ancient legal code was established by Draco, an Athenian lawmaker, in the 7th century BC. The law was known for its severity and harsh punishments, which included the death penalty for even minor offenses. Despite its brutality, Draco's Law played a significant role in shaping the legal system of ancient Greece and laid the foundation for future legal developments in the region.

Strauder v. West Virginia is the correct answer because this constitutional case established the first equal protection clause used for racial protection. In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that excluding African Americans from serving on juries solely based on their race violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. This decision set an important precedent for future cases involving racial discrimination and equal protection under the law.

Gibbons v. Ogden is the correct answer because this case, decided by the Supreme Court in 1824, established the federal government's control over commerce. The case involved a dispute between two steamboat operators, Gibbons and Ogden, over the exclusive right to operate steamboats in New York waters. The Supreme Court ruled that Congress had the power to regulate interstate commerce, including navigation, and that state laws granting exclusive rights were unconstitutional. This landmark decision expanded the federal government's authority over commerce and set an important precedent for future interpretations of the Commerce Clause of the Constitution.

M'Culloch v. Maryland is the correct answer because this case, decided in 1819, established the principle of federal supremacy. The Supreme Court ruled that the U.S. Constitution is the "Supreme Law of the Land" and that states cannot pass laws that interfere with or contradict federal laws. This landmark decision solidified the power of the federal government and its authority over the states, shaping the interpretation of the Constitution for years to come.

Under the "Felony Murder" rule, a person can be convicted of murder even if they have never killed anyone themselves. This rule applies when a person is involved in the commission of a dangerous felony, such as robbery or burglary, and someone dies as a result of that felony. In such cases, all participants in the felony can be held responsible for the death, regardless of whether they directly caused it or not. Therefore, even if a person has never personally killed someone, they can still be convicted of murder under the "Felony Murder" rule if they were involved in a felony that resulted in a death.