302 Midterm : ) - Chapter 2

A Public university's Rule of Conduct can reduce or censor First Amendment Rights to protect the health and safety of students on campus?

False

A traditional public forum is closed to nongovernment users to protect the core purpose of the property

False

Ad hoc balancing is used to determine the proper awards or penalties when judges make equity rulings

False

Content-based laws must pass intermediate scrutiny to be constitutional

False

Content-neutral time, place, and manner restrictions must pass strict scrutiny in order to be constitutional

False

Court injunctions that stop publication are always unconstitutional prior restraints

False

Government regulations that target the content of speech because of government disfavor with the ideas expressed are called content-neutral

False

In ad hoc balancing, courts employ strict rules of statutory interpretation

False

John Milton said that the open exchange of ideas in an unfettered marketplace will allow convincing falsehoods to overcome the truth

False

Once a city creates a public square, it can no longer regulate the time, place and manner of the speakers?

False

Originalists believe that interpretation of the Constitution should be guided by the actual text of the document

False

Private Property that is used by the public is called a traditional public forum

False

The First Amendment came first in the Bill of Rights because the framers believed it was the most important and core right of the people

False

The First Amendment does not limit the power of state or local legislatures

False

The First Amendment was created to protect residents of a state from being censored or restrained by state laws?

False

The State of California can prohibit certain types of commercial speech?

False

The U.S. Supreme Court consistently has interpreted the free press clause of the First Amendment to confer special privileged and responsibilities on the press

False

The U.S. Supreme Court has said that prior restraint is sometimes necessary to counterbalance the power of large media corporations to drown out alternate voices and different ideas

False

The social contract is part of the First Amendment that requires the people to act responsibly in exchange for their freedoms

False

Throughout history, the U.S. Supreme Court has relied heavily on natural rights theory to guide its First Amendment interpretations because this theory provides clear boundaries to personal liberties

False

To be constitutional under strict scrutiny review, a law must reasonably advance an important government interest

False

Under the First Amendment, the government is prohibited from restraining any speech?

False

A classical prior restraint imposes broad government power to review and select acceptable content before ideas are published

True

Because content-based laws pose a greater risk to the freedom of speech and of the press that do content-neutral laws, the U.S. Supreme Court uses amore lenient test to determine when content-neutral laws are constitutional

True

Both content-based and viewpoint-based regulations target speech because of government disfavor with the ideas expressed

True

Functionalists, or instrumentalists, believe that the First Amendment protects the freedom of speech and of the press only because these freedoms advance important societal goals, such as democracy

True

Justices who rely on original intent to determine the correct meaning and application of the First Amendment argue that the framers understood and left a clear record of the meaning of the freedom of speech and of the press

True

Textualists believe that interpretation of the Constitution should be guided entirely by its own language without reference to history or contemporary issues

True

The First Amendment is a nearly complete ban to prior restraints

True

The First Amendment protection for freedom of expression means prior restrains by government are constitutional only as a last resort to meet a compelling need

True

The First Amendment stands as a nearly absolute ban to prior restraint

True

The crime of sedition punishes truthful criticism of government

True

The government bears an exceptionally heavy burden of proof to justify any prior restraint because prior restraints are inherently likely to distort the marketplace of ideas and to publish ideas that government disfavors

True

Through its self-delegated power to interpret and apply the U.S. Constitution, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that the First Amendment limits the power of state legislatures as well as Congress

True

Truthful criticism of government was punished under sedition laws

True

In reviewing the constitutionality of laws, the Supreme Court has established than an important government interest is

a significant but not compelling interest

The First Amendment prohibits abridgments of the freedom of speech and the press by

all levels and branches of government

If the First Amendment stands as a nearly complete ban on prior restraints, they nonetheless may be constitutional to prevent

all of these

Laws of general application

apply to the media in the same way as other businesses

The Supreme Court has said that, under the First Amendment, political speech is

at the core of the protected freedom of speech

Laws that indirectly limit the freedom of speech while achieving other substantial government objectives are called

both content-neutral restrictions and time, place, and manner restrictions

The Supreme Court generally interprets freedom of speech and freedom of the press

by combining the two terms into freedom of expression

The legal protection of anonymous speakers online and offline is

determined in the U.S. by balancing the rights of anonymous speakers against other important values

To determine the constitutionality of government actions, the Supreme Court employs

different tests to respond to different impacts of government actions on constitutionally protected rights and freedoms

Prior review

enables government to stop publications before they reach the public

In the are of government speech, the U.S. Supreme Court has

found the First Amendment does not deal expressly with government speech or speaker

In New York Times v. US, the Supreme Court said that

government bears an extremely heavy burden of proof to justify prior restraints

Under strict scrutiny, a law is constitutional only if it

is narrowly tailored to serve a compelling government interest

When government funds activities that involve expression, it

may not discriminate on the basis of the content of expression if it creates a public forum

Instrumentalists argue that the First Amendment advances all of the following goals except

obscenity

To guide its application of the First Amendment, the Supreme Court relies on

original intent, textual interpretation, ad hoc balancing, and categorical balancing

Courts find content-based restrictions of speech constitutional if they

pass strict scrutiny

In First Amendment jurisprudence, original intent means the

perceived purpose of the constitutional framers

Prior restraints on speech are

presumptively unconstitutional and rarely constitutional

In Near v. Minnesota, the Supreme Court ruled that

prior restraints pose a serious threat of censorship as well as that laws that punish past actions by banning future publications are a form of prior restraint

Traditional public forums include

public property designed and historically used for public gathering and association

When the Supreme Court reviews the constitutionality of laws, it applies

rational review, intermediate review, or strict scrutiny

In Reed v. Town of Gilbert, the Supreme Court held that laws

that distinguish treatment based on the message are content-based

Content-neutral regulations are also called

time, place, and manner regulations

In several recent decisions, the U,S, Supreme Court has held that state or federal limits on campaign spending

unconstitutionally restrict the freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment