POS 475 TEST WITH COMPLETE
SOLUTION
Current members of the Supreme Court - Answer -John Roberts (george w. bush)
-Clarence Thomas (george h.w. bush)
-Amy Coney Barrett (trump)
-Stephen Breyer (bill clinton)
-Samuel Alito (george w. bush)
-Sonia Sotomayor (barack obama)
-Elena Kagan (barack obama)
-Neil Gorsuch (trump)
-Brett Kavanaugh (trump)
original intent - Answer A view that the Constitution should be interpreted according to
the original intent of the framers. Many conservatives support this view.
Textualism 1: Literalism - Answer plain meaning
Textualism 2: Meaning of the Words - Answer meaning of the words at the time they
were written
Polls of Other Jurisdictions - Answer Examines practices in the United States and even
abroad
Structural Analysis - Answer an analysis of the roots and affixes of words
stare decisis - Answer Let the decision stand; decisions are based on precedents from
previous cases
Balancing Decisions - Answer weighing competing rights against each other
cost-benefit analysis - Answer a study that compares the costs and benefits to society of
providing a public good
external forces - Answer forces from agents outside the system
writ of certiorari - Answer An order by a higher court directing a lower court to send up
a case for review
the rule of four - Answer At least four justices of the Supreme Court must vote to
,consider a case before it can be heard
solicitor general - Answer A presidential appointee and the third-ranking office in the
Department of Justice. The solicitor general is in charge of the appellate court litigation
of the federal government.
amicus curiae brief - Answer "friend of the court" brief filed by an interest group to
influence a Supreme Court decision
majority opinion - Answer a statement that presents the views of the majority of supreme
court justices regarding a case
concurring opinion - Answer An opinion that agrees with the majority in a Supreme
Court ruling but differs on the reasoning.
dissenting opinion - Answer A statement written by a justice who disagrees with the
majority opinion, presenting his or her opinion
incorporation doctrine - Answer The legal concept under which the Supreme Court has
nationalized the Bill of Rights by making most of its provisions applicable to the states
through the Fourteenth Amendment.
Reynolds v. US (1875) - Answer Court ruled that one cannot use religion as a defense to
the crime of polygamy. Court ruled that religious practices that impair the public
interest do not fall under the First Amendment. (valid secular policy)
Pierce v. Society of Sisters (1925) - Answer Though states may require public education,
they may not require that students attend only public schools (ignored policy test)
Cantwell v. Connecticut (1940) - Answer Religious speech is protected, even from door
to door, and cannot be regulated, as it would violate the 1st and 14th amendments (free
exercise clause, recognized absolute freedom of belief)
Valid Secular Policy Test - Answer "If the law, interfering with religious practice, serves
a legitimate non-religious goal, not directed at a particular religion, then the law is
valid."
Prince v. Massachusetts (1944) - Answer (holding) the power of the state to control the
conduct of children reaches beyond the scope of its authority over adults
Minersville School District v. Gobitis (1940) - Answer Two children were expelled for not
saluting the American flag at school due to being Jehovah's Witnesses. Result: SC ruled
that the salute does not infringe on liberties protected by the 1st and 14th. National
unity. - in the state's interest
West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943) - Answer landmark decision
by the United States Supreme Court holding that the Free Speech Clause of the First
Amendment protects students from being forced to salute the American flag or say the
Pledge of Allegiance in public school.
, Braunfeld v. Brown (1961) - Answer Braunfeld was Jewish and owned a store and
wanted to be able to sell alcohol on Sundays because his religion didn't allow him to
work on Saturdays. The PA Blue law didn't allow this
Decision: The PA law does not violate Braunfeld's rights
Found that the law had a legitimate state interest of having a day of rest (secular
interest)
Sherbert v. Verner (1963) - Answer the Court ruled (7-2) that disqualifying Sherbert, a
Seventh-Day Adventist, from receiving unemployment benefits violated the
free-exercise clause, sherbert/yoder test, least restrictive means
Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972) - Answer The Court ruled that Wisconsin could not require
Amish parents to send their children to public school beyond the eighth grade because
it would violate long-held religious beliefs.
Sherbert-Yoder Test - Answer from two cases, Sherbert v. Verner (1963) and Wisconsin
v. Yoder (1972) which involved Seventh-Day Adventists and Amish, respectively, who
refused to work on Saturday and were denied unemployment benefits, and who
preferred to educate their children at home. The Court ruled that benefits and
homeschooling should be allowed because the government's rationales were too vague,
to prevent fraud and discourage ignorance. A special burden is on the state to show a
specific, compelling interest to regulate when a valid request for religious exemption is
presented.
Employment Division v. Smith (1990) - Answer Held that the Free Exercise Clause
permits the States to prohibit sacramental peyote (cactus with psychoactive alkaloids)
use and thus to deny unemployment benefits to persons discharged for such use.
Smith Test - Answer the free exercise clause does not relieve an individual from the
obligation to comply with a valid and neutral law of general applicability on the ground
that the law commands behavior inconsistent with one's religious teachings
Religious Freedom Restoration Act (1993) - Answer Restored compelling purpose
guidelines for courts to use when states restrict religious liberty. Struck down by
Supreme Court in Boerne v. Flores.
City of Boerne v. Flores (1997) - Answer Congress may enact legislation enforcing
constitutional rights established by the Court (like the Religious Freedom Restoration
Act), but it does not have the power to expand those religious freedom rights with
federal regulation and oversight.
Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal (2006) - Answer Court held
that, under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the government had failed to show a
compelling interest in prosecuting religious adherents for drinking a sacramental tea
containing a Schedule I controlled substance.
wall of separation between church and state - Answer A phrase coined by Thomas
SOLUTION
Current members of the Supreme Court - Answer -John Roberts (george w. bush)
-Clarence Thomas (george h.w. bush)
-Amy Coney Barrett (trump)
-Stephen Breyer (bill clinton)
-Samuel Alito (george w. bush)
-Sonia Sotomayor (barack obama)
-Elena Kagan (barack obama)
-Neil Gorsuch (trump)
-Brett Kavanaugh (trump)
original intent - Answer A view that the Constitution should be interpreted according to
the original intent of the framers. Many conservatives support this view.
Textualism 1: Literalism - Answer plain meaning
Textualism 2: Meaning of the Words - Answer meaning of the words at the time they
were written
Polls of Other Jurisdictions - Answer Examines practices in the United States and even
abroad
Structural Analysis - Answer an analysis of the roots and affixes of words
stare decisis - Answer Let the decision stand; decisions are based on precedents from
previous cases
Balancing Decisions - Answer weighing competing rights against each other
cost-benefit analysis - Answer a study that compares the costs and benefits to society of
providing a public good
external forces - Answer forces from agents outside the system
writ of certiorari - Answer An order by a higher court directing a lower court to send up
a case for review
the rule of four - Answer At least four justices of the Supreme Court must vote to
,consider a case before it can be heard
solicitor general - Answer A presidential appointee and the third-ranking office in the
Department of Justice. The solicitor general is in charge of the appellate court litigation
of the federal government.
amicus curiae brief - Answer "friend of the court" brief filed by an interest group to
influence a Supreme Court decision
majority opinion - Answer a statement that presents the views of the majority of supreme
court justices regarding a case
concurring opinion - Answer An opinion that agrees with the majority in a Supreme
Court ruling but differs on the reasoning.
dissenting opinion - Answer A statement written by a justice who disagrees with the
majority opinion, presenting his or her opinion
incorporation doctrine - Answer The legal concept under which the Supreme Court has
nationalized the Bill of Rights by making most of its provisions applicable to the states
through the Fourteenth Amendment.
Reynolds v. US (1875) - Answer Court ruled that one cannot use religion as a defense to
the crime of polygamy. Court ruled that religious practices that impair the public
interest do not fall under the First Amendment. (valid secular policy)
Pierce v. Society of Sisters (1925) - Answer Though states may require public education,
they may not require that students attend only public schools (ignored policy test)
Cantwell v. Connecticut (1940) - Answer Religious speech is protected, even from door
to door, and cannot be regulated, as it would violate the 1st and 14th amendments (free
exercise clause, recognized absolute freedom of belief)
Valid Secular Policy Test - Answer "If the law, interfering with religious practice, serves
a legitimate non-religious goal, not directed at a particular religion, then the law is
valid."
Prince v. Massachusetts (1944) - Answer (holding) the power of the state to control the
conduct of children reaches beyond the scope of its authority over adults
Minersville School District v. Gobitis (1940) - Answer Two children were expelled for not
saluting the American flag at school due to being Jehovah's Witnesses. Result: SC ruled
that the salute does not infringe on liberties protected by the 1st and 14th. National
unity. - in the state's interest
West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943) - Answer landmark decision
by the United States Supreme Court holding that the Free Speech Clause of the First
Amendment protects students from being forced to salute the American flag or say the
Pledge of Allegiance in public school.
, Braunfeld v. Brown (1961) - Answer Braunfeld was Jewish and owned a store and
wanted to be able to sell alcohol on Sundays because his religion didn't allow him to
work on Saturdays. The PA Blue law didn't allow this
Decision: The PA law does not violate Braunfeld's rights
Found that the law had a legitimate state interest of having a day of rest (secular
interest)
Sherbert v. Verner (1963) - Answer the Court ruled (7-2) that disqualifying Sherbert, a
Seventh-Day Adventist, from receiving unemployment benefits violated the
free-exercise clause, sherbert/yoder test, least restrictive means
Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972) - Answer The Court ruled that Wisconsin could not require
Amish parents to send their children to public school beyond the eighth grade because
it would violate long-held religious beliefs.
Sherbert-Yoder Test - Answer from two cases, Sherbert v. Verner (1963) and Wisconsin
v. Yoder (1972) which involved Seventh-Day Adventists and Amish, respectively, who
refused to work on Saturday and were denied unemployment benefits, and who
preferred to educate their children at home. The Court ruled that benefits and
homeschooling should be allowed because the government's rationales were too vague,
to prevent fraud and discourage ignorance. A special burden is on the state to show a
specific, compelling interest to regulate when a valid request for religious exemption is
presented.
Employment Division v. Smith (1990) - Answer Held that the Free Exercise Clause
permits the States to prohibit sacramental peyote (cactus with psychoactive alkaloids)
use and thus to deny unemployment benefits to persons discharged for such use.
Smith Test - Answer the free exercise clause does not relieve an individual from the
obligation to comply with a valid and neutral law of general applicability on the ground
that the law commands behavior inconsistent with one's religious teachings
Religious Freedom Restoration Act (1993) - Answer Restored compelling purpose
guidelines for courts to use when states restrict religious liberty. Struck down by
Supreme Court in Boerne v. Flores.
City of Boerne v. Flores (1997) - Answer Congress may enact legislation enforcing
constitutional rights established by the Court (like the Religious Freedom Restoration
Act), but it does not have the power to expand those religious freedom rights with
federal regulation and oversight.
Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal (2006) - Answer Court held
that, under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the government had failed to show a
compelling interest in prosecuting religious adherents for drinking a sacramental tea
containing a Schedule I controlled substance.
wall of separation between church and state - Answer A phrase coined by Thomas
