1. A pesticide company advertised and marketing its pesticides as safe for humans and pets. A class action was filed against the company, claiming that the pesticides had resulted in the deaths of animals near use of the pesticides, including numerous dogs and cats. The class action pled claims under the state's law for strict liability for harm suffered as a result of factually false advertising. The company moved to dismiss the claim as a violation of its first amendment rights. How should the court rule?

A. Deny the motion because the constitution does not protect false commercial speech. B. Deny the motion because the states regulate pesticides as a matter of health and safety. C. Grant the motion because the class action has not alleged that the company knew the statements were false. D. Grant the motion because the company's claims were protected commercial speech.

2. The city received numerous verified complaints from local businesses that picketing and protests were driving out tourists and hurting tourism-depending businesses. After investigation, notice and comment, the City found that the businesses' concerns were justified and passed an ordinance prohibiting picketing within 10 feet of any business on any issue other than an issue pending in an election within 100 days of that election. Protestors wishing to protest the water use of a City golf course sued the city to overturn the anti-picketing ordinance as violating their free speech rights. Which of the following options best states the probable outcome? A. The city prevails because the ordinance excepted core political speech. B. The city prevails because the ordinance regulated conduct rather than speech. C. The protestors prevail because the ordinance discriminates among protests. D. The protestors prevail because the ordinance regulates speech based on content.

3. A 16 year old high school student, known for streaming himself playing online virtual fighting games, went on a mass shooting spree leaving several city residents dead or seriously injured. In response, the city council adopted an ordinance prohibiting retailers from publicly displaying or selling to any minor child any material that may harm minors due to its violent or sexually explicit content. The city then prosecuted the owner of the gaming store that had sold the student most of his games on the basis that it continued to display advertisements for the virtual fighting games that the student had been known to play.

Which of the following is the best constitutional argument in the store owner's defense?

A. The ordinance violates free speech and expression unless the materials are utterly without redeeming value. B. The ordinance is excessively vague and overbroad under the First and Fourteenth Amendments. C. The ordinance violates free speech because it targets material based on its content. D. The ordinance violates equal protection because it treats minors differently from adults.