1|Page
JOMC 486 Midterm UNL Exam, MOST RECENT EXAM
2026 ACTUAL COMPREHENSIVE FREQUENTLY MOST
TESTED REAL EXAM QUESTIONS AND VERIFIED
SOLUTIONS||VERIFIED EXAM!!||ALREADY GRADED
A+ | NEWEST EXAM!!!
Brandenburg was convicted under the Ohio Criminal
Syndicalism law which prohibited (brandenburg vs. ohio) -
Answers-advocacy of violence to bring about industrial or
political reform.
Brandenburg was filmed at a rally of (brandenburg vs.
ohio) - Answers-the Ku Klux Klan.
In the 1927 Whitney v. California decision, the U.S.
Supreme Court had said a criminal syndicalism statute
similar to Ohio's was (brandenburg vs. ohio) - Answers-
constitutional.
According to the Supreme Court, advocating violent
means to effect political change is unlawful only when
(brandenburg vs. ohio) - Answers-it is directed to incite
imminent lawless action.
,2|Page
Of what criminal offense was Johnson charged?
(Texas vs. Johnson) - Answers-Desecration of a venerated
object.
Which of the following is an interest the Texas used to
justify Johnson's conviction? (Texas vs. Johnson) -
Answers-Preserving the flag as a symbol of nationhood.
The Supreme Court first had to determine whether
Johnson's burning the flag was expressive conduct
meaning (Texas vs. Johnson) - Answers-he intended to
convey a message that was likely to be understood by
those who viewed it.
In its majority opinion, the Supreme Court ruled that the
restrictions on Johnson's expression were unrelated to the
suppression of expression. (Texas vs. Johnson) (TRUE
OR FALSE) - Answers-false
In a dissenting opinion, Chief Justice Rehnquist and
Justices White and O'Connor said the Texas law did not
restrict Johnson's First Amendment rights because he
could have expressed himself in several different ways
, 3|Page
other than flag-burning. (Texas vs. Johnson) (TRUE OR
FALSE) - Answers-true
Barry Black burned a cross at a (virginia vs. black) -
Answers-rally of Ku Klux Klan members.
Richard Elliott and Jonathan O'Mara burned a cross
(virginia vs. black) - Answers-on the front lawn of a
neighbor.
The "prima facie" provision of the Virginia law said jurors
could presume (virginia vs. black) - Answers-that the cross
burning was done with the intent to intimidate others.
The Supreme Court said the First Amendment allows
states to punish cross burning done with an intent to
intimidate because such acts amount to (virginia vs. black)
- Answers-a true threat.
The plurality opinion found the Virginia statute
unconstitutional because it (virginia vs. black) - Answers-
the prima facie provision eliminates the need to prove an
intent to intimidate.
JOMC 486 Midterm UNL Exam, MOST RECENT EXAM
2026 ACTUAL COMPREHENSIVE FREQUENTLY MOST
TESTED REAL EXAM QUESTIONS AND VERIFIED
SOLUTIONS||VERIFIED EXAM!!||ALREADY GRADED
A+ | NEWEST EXAM!!!
Brandenburg was convicted under the Ohio Criminal
Syndicalism law which prohibited (brandenburg vs. ohio) -
Answers-advocacy of violence to bring about industrial or
political reform.
Brandenburg was filmed at a rally of (brandenburg vs.
ohio) - Answers-the Ku Klux Klan.
In the 1927 Whitney v. California decision, the U.S.
Supreme Court had said a criminal syndicalism statute
similar to Ohio's was (brandenburg vs. ohio) - Answers-
constitutional.
According to the Supreme Court, advocating violent
means to effect political change is unlawful only when
(brandenburg vs. ohio) - Answers-it is directed to incite
imminent lawless action.
,2|Page
Of what criminal offense was Johnson charged?
(Texas vs. Johnson) - Answers-Desecration of a venerated
object.
Which of the following is an interest the Texas used to
justify Johnson's conviction? (Texas vs. Johnson) -
Answers-Preserving the flag as a symbol of nationhood.
The Supreme Court first had to determine whether
Johnson's burning the flag was expressive conduct
meaning (Texas vs. Johnson) - Answers-he intended to
convey a message that was likely to be understood by
those who viewed it.
In its majority opinion, the Supreme Court ruled that the
restrictions on Johnson's expression were unrelated to the
suppression of expression. (Texas vs. Johnson) (TRUE
OR FALSE) - Answers-false
In a dissenting opinion, Chief Justice Rehnquist and
Justices White and O'Connor said the Texas law did not
restrict Johnson's First Amendment rights because he
could have expressed himself in several different ways
, 3|Page
other than flag-burning. (Texas vs. Johnson) (TRUE OR
FALSE) - Answers-true
Barry Black burned a cross at a (virginia vs. black) -
Answers-rally of Ku Klux Klan members.
Richard Elliott and Jonathan O'Mara burned a cross
(virginia vs. black) - Answers-on the front lawn of a
neighbor.
The "prima facie" provision of the Virginia law said jurors
could presume (virginia vs. black) - Answers-that the cross
burning was done with the intent to intimidate others.
The Supreme Court said the First Amendment allows
states to punish cross burning done with an intent to
intimidate because such acts amount to (virginia vs. black)
- Answers-a true threat.
The plurality opinion found the Virginia statute
unconstitutional because it (virginia vs. black) - Answers-
the prima facie provision eliminates the need to prove an
intent to intimidate.
