JOUR 371 Final Exam - ALL QUIZ QUESTIONS
MAY 2022
The term that describes the topics and people/parties over which a court has
authority is:
Jurisdiction.
Among the 50 states,
How court systems are structured and how judges are selected varies widely because
each state establishes its own system.
Bob was a tenant at College Apartments where a night swim event was held for
tenants in the community pool. Bob had seen a movie on television in which
pranksters put dye in pool water just before a night swim to stain the skin of
anyone in the pool. Right before the night swim, Bob modified the prank by
pouring gallons of chlorine bleach into the pool, thinking it would make the
swimmers' skin itch. It did, but the bleach also caused serious skin burns,
resulting in several swimmers being hospitalized. Bob admitted what he had done
and said he was sorry. The injured tenants, though, still faced hospital bills and
other expenses. They met and talked about what to do. The consensus was that
Bob certainly didn't have enough money to pay their bills and that the company
that made the movie shared the blame. If they decide to sue the moviemaker,
what will they have to prove?
A close, causal connection between the movie and Bob's actions.
Many government secrets, military and otherwise, provide safety to citizens. A
frequent problem, however, is that the "national security" outlier to First
Amendment expression is often invoked:
To hide information that, if disclosed, would provide accountability and embarrass
government officials or operations - but pose no risk to public safety.
Angry residents of Missouri gathered outside the state Capitol where a speaker
said, "We ought to go in this building, find the lawmakers who favor gun control
and beat them until they can give us a reason why the Second Amendment
doesn't apply to us." If the speaker is arrested what standard will be applied to
determine guilt or innocence?
Whether the expression was incitement likely to result in imminent lawless action
After a series of arson cases in which the homes of police officers were burned, a
Local News anchor said on the air, "When this person is captured, the police
ought to set his house on fire - with him in it." What legal principle applies?
This is likely protected expression, given that media workers, despite strong words,
have not been seen as engaging in actual incitement.
In Mississippi, almost all state court judges are:
Elected by popular vote to serve four-year terms.
What do we know about obscenity?
Obscene expression is an outlier and receives no First Amendment protection.
Why are some laws/legal standards different for youths?
The policy/rationale is that the reasoning powers of adulthood have not matured, or at
least not fully matured, in youths
, Frank got a job at a car wash, and it wasn't long before he became frustrated at
the number of customers who applied their brakes while their vehicles were being
towed through the tunnel. This risked damage to the equipment as well as a pile-
up in the tunnel. He started telling each driver entering the conveyor belt, "Keep
your damn foot off the brake." His supervisor heard Frank say this to one driver
and reported it to their boss. The boss fired Frank. What do you know about this?
There's no First Amendment issue here.
Right after graduation, Betsy landed a job as digital media specialist for Land's
Beginnings, an online clothing store. Some days she was assigned to monitor
comments on the company website. Her boss instructed her to remove any
negative comments or reviews, leaving only comments praising Land's
Beginnings and posting five-star ratings. Betsy didn't think this was an ethical
practice and texted you because she knows you made an A back at Ole Miss in
Communications Law. Betsy wants to know if removing the negative comments
and reviews is illegal. You paid attention, so you tell her:
No. It may be dishonest, but it's not illegal.
The City of Oxford enacted an ordinance that read, "No music or other sounds
that are too loud will be permitted in residential areas of the city limits between
midnight and 8 a.m. Saturdays and weekdays and midnight and noon on
Sundays." Is this a constitutional ordinance?
No. The Constitution allows time, place and manner control of expression if there's a
reason that serves the public interest - but it also requires precision. "Too loud" is highly
subjective and would likely be unconstitutionally vague.
Judy was a newly hired member of the History Department faculty at the
University of Mississippi. She had earned her Ph.D. at the University of Memphis
and remained a super-loyal fan of University of Memphis "Tiger" athletics. She
placed a large Tiger logo on her office door and a sign that read, "Go Tigers,
Beat ...." Underneath the sign she would place the name of any team competing
against the University of Memphis, including the University of Mississippi. Her
colleagues were incensed by this, especially when the sign on her door was
configured to read, "GO TIGERS, BEAT OLE MISS." The colleagues' complaints
made their way to University of Mississippi administrators who passed a rule
saying, "No faculty office door may display any information other than the name
and rank of the faculty member and the faculty member's office hours." What is
the law here?
While the Constitution permits state actors to create rules regulating the time, place and
manner of expressions, those rules must also serve a reasonable purpose and not be
artifices that appear to be neutral but are actually targeted at specific expressions.
In the modern democracies that limit or ban certain expressions - such as racial
epithets, criticism of a religion or swastikas - the underlying rationale is:
Such expressions do not advance a culture.
In the United States, the rationale for not banning pure "hate speech" is:
A. People as individuals should be free to assign worth/value to an expression.
B.
Government is not allowed by the First Amendment to use popularity to control
expression.
MAY 2022
The term that describes the topics and people/parties over which a court has
authority is:
Jurisdiction.
Among the 50 states,
How court systems are structured and how judges are selected varies widely because
each state establishes its own system.
Bob was a tenant at College Apartments where a night swim event was held for
tenants in the community pool. Bob had seen a movie on television in which
pranksters put dye in pool water just before a night swim to stain the skin of
anyone in the pool. Right before the night swim, Bob modified the prank by
pouring gallons of chlorine bleach into the pool, thinking it would make the
swimmers' skin itch. It did, but the bleach also caused serious skin burns,
resulting in several swimmers being hospitalized. Bob admitted what he had done
and said he was sorry. The injured tenants, though, still faced hospital bills and
other expenses. They met and talked about what to do. The consensus was that
Bob certainly didn't have enough money to pay their bills and that the company
that made the movie shared the blame. If they decide to sue the moviemaker,
what will they have to prove?
A close, causal connection between the movie and Bob's actions.
Many government secrets, military and otherwise, provide safety to citizens. A
frequent problem, however, is that the "national security" outlier to First
Amendment expression is often invoked:
To hide information that, if disclosed, would provide accountability and embarrass
government officials or operations - but pose no risk to public safety.
Angry residents of Missouri gathered outside the state Capitol where a speaker
said, "We ought to go in this building, find the lawmakers who favor gun control
and beat them until they can give us a reason why the Second Amendment
doesn't apply to us." If the speaker is arrested what standard will be applied to
determine guilt or innocence?
Whether the expression was incitement likely to result in imminent lawless action
After a series of arson cases in which the homes of police officers were burned, a
Local News anchor said on the air, "When this person is captured, the police
ought to set his house on fire - with him in it." What legal principle applies?
This is likely protected expression, given that media workers, despite strong words,
have not been seen as engaging in actual incitement.
In Mississippi, almost all state court judges are:
Elected by popular vote to serve four-year terms.
What do we know about obscenity?
Obscene expression is an outlier and receives no First Amendment protection.
Why are some laws/legal standards different for youths?
The policy/rationale is that the reasoning powers of adulthood have not matured, or at
least not fully matured, in youths
, Frank got a job at a car wash, and it wasn't long before he became frustrated at
the number of customers who applied their brakes while their vehicles were being
towed through the tunnel. This risked damage to the equipment as well as a pile-
up in the tunnel. He started telling each driver entering the conveyor belt, "Keep
your damn foot off the brake." His supervisor heard Frank say this to one driver
and reported it to their boss. The boss fired Frank. What do you know about this?
There's no First Amendment issue here.
Right after graduation, Betsy landed a job as digital media specialist for Land's
Beginnings, an online clothing store. Some days she was assigned to monitor
comments on the company website. Her boss instructed her to remove any
negative comments or reviews, leaving only comments praising Land's
Beginnings and posting five-star ratings. Betsy didn't think this was an ethical
practice and texted you because she knows you made an A back at Ole Miss in
Communications Law. Betsy wants to know if removing the negative comments
and reviews is illegal. You paid attention, so you tell her:
No. It may be dishonest, but it's not illegal.
The City of Oxford enacted an ordinance that read, "No music or other sounds
that are too loud will be permitted in residential areas of the city limits between
midnight and 8 a.m. Saturdays and weekdays and midnight and noon on
Sundays." Is this a constitutional ordinance?
No. The Constitution allows time, place and manner control of expression if there's a
reason that serves the public interest - but it also requires precision. "Too loud" is highly
subjective and would likely be unconstitutionally vague.
Judy was a newly hired member of the History Department faculty at the
University of Mississippi. She had earned her Ph.D. at the University of Memphis
and remained a super-loyal fan of University of Memphis "Tiger" athletics. She
placed a large Tiger logo on her office door and a sign that read, "Go Tigers,
Beat ...." Underneath the sign she would place the name of any team competing
against the University of Memphis, including the University of Mississippi. Her
colleagues were incensed by this, especially when the sign on her door was
configured to read, "GO TIGERS, BEAT OLE MISS." The colleagues' complaints
made their way to University of Mississippi administrators who passed a rule
saying, "No faculty office door may display any information other than the name
and rank of the faculty member and the faculty member's office hours." What is
the law here?
While the Constitution permits state actors to create rules regulating the time, place and
manner of expressions, those rules must also serve a reasonable purpose and not be
artifices that appear to be neutral but are actually targeted at specific expressions.
In the modern democracies that limit or ban certain expressions - such as racial
epithets, criticism of a religion or swastikas - the underlying rationale is:
Such expressions do not advance a culture.
In the United States, the rationale for not banning pure "hate speech" is:
A. People as individuals should be free to assign worth/value to an expression.
B.
Government is not allowed by the First Amendment to use popularity to control
expression.
