1. City X passes a law that states that [t]he driver of a motor vehicle when reasonably necessary to ensure safe operation shall give audible warning with his horn, but that [t]he horn shall not otherwise be used, except as a theft alarm system. A group of protestors who disagree with the President's policies hold a protest where its members drove along the President's travel route and continuously honked their horns. Five of the protestors were arrested and cited for violating the honking law. The protestors have presented the defense that the law is unconstitutional. Should the Court uphold the law's constitutionality? A. No because the protestors lack standing to challenge the law.

B. No because it is not narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling government interest.

C. Yes because one need not need only observe the traffic circumstances and determine if a safety risk is present

D. Yes because it leaves open alternative channels for communication of the information. 2. Following an escalating series of confrontations among neighbors in a condominium complex over election signs during a tense school board election year, the complex's private homeowners' association, which governs members' land use, bans all yard signs except for sports signs. A homeowner who is running for school board president sues the homeowner's association, claiming that the rule violates his First Amendment rights. A reviewing court should: (A) Strike down the rule, unless the association can prove that it is narrowly tailored to further a compelling government interest. (B) Strike down the rule, if there are not ample alternative channels of expression for residents. (C) Dismiss the suit, because the yard signs are not speech. (D) Dismiss the suit because the First Amendment doesn't apply.

3. A state initiated a criminal prosecution against the owner of a bar for hosting a Drag Show, in which male performers dress up as flamboyant female performers and perform songs and other entertainment. The state charged the bar with violation of the anti-obscenity law. The bar owner defended on the ground that the prosecution violated his constitutional right to freedom of speech. Should the bar owner prevail in this defense? A. Yes because men dressing as women performers does not satisfy the criteria for obscene speech as a matter of constitutional law.

B. Yes because the state lacks a compelling interest in the safety and morality in adult establishments.

C. No because the bar engaged in commercial speech which is subject to lower first amendment protection.

D. No because the regulation directly advances and is narrowly tailored to serve a substantial government interest.

4. In the first months of the covid-19 breakout, Bradley Teenson made the following post on facebook: This just in: Sherriff deputies promise to shoot on site anyone with covid-19! He was prosecuted under the State's terrorism statute, which states Terrorizing is the intentional communication of information that the commission of a crime of violence is imminent or in progress or that a circumstance dangerous to human life exists or is about to exist, with the intent of causing members of the general public to be in sustained fear for their safety. Teenson argues that he did not fall under the scope of the statute, and that in any event his conduct is protected under the First Amendment.

How should the Court rule on Teenson's First Amendment defense?

A. In favor of the State, because Teenson's statements fall outside the First Amendment.

B. In favor of the State, because the regulation serves a significant government interest.

C. In favor of Teenson because it did not incite imminent lawless action

D. In favor of Teenson because Sherriff's deputies are public figures on a matter of public concern.

5. Mary was employed by a California State public university as an administrator. She learned that a recruiter at the university was throwing away applicants filed by persons of a certain race. She reported the conduct to the Dean of the University. Instead of investigating the issue, the Dean fired her for disruptive conduct interfering with management of the university. Mary has filed a lawsuit claiming that her termination violated her constitutional right of freedom of speech because she was fired in retaliation for exercising her rights to free speech. How should the court rule on Mary's constitutional claim? (A) For Marcy, because the Dean had no compelling reason to fire her.

(B) For Mary, because the abridgment of Mary's freedom of speech outweighs the University's interest in prohibiting disruptive conduct in this case.

(C) For the University because federal courts cannot review a the merits of a personnel decision by a public agency

(D) For the University because Mary has no right to freedom of speech in this context 6. The federal government enacted a statute to provide funding for programs intended to boost renewable energy and decrease reliance on fossil fuels. The funds were distributed to researchers and universities based on an application and grant process. Before receiving the grant funds, recipients had to agree to support renewables in their programs using the targeted funds. A university professor, Mr. Greene, applied for and received the grant. He used it to fund a seminar regarding energy uses. During a class in the seminar, Mr. Greene assigned reading and assignments regarding the benefits of fossil fuel use. The federal government learned of Mr. Greene's advocacy of fossil fuels and terminated him from the program and required a return of any outstanding grant funds. Mr. Greene filed a lawsuit seeking a declaratory judgment that terminating of the grant violated his constitutional rights to free speech. How should the court rule? A. For Greene because the government retaliated against him for exercising his right to free speech.

B. For Greene because on balance his right to speak on an issue of public concern outweighs the government interest in promoting their views of fossil view use.

C. For the government because public employees do not have a first amendment right to freedom of speech.

D. For the government because it is permitted to engage in viewpoint discrimination when requiring that government officials speak for the government. 7. Earth Vision is a Christian nonprofit organization that offered employment to Ms. Adams as an Information Technology technician, but later rescinded that job offer upon learning of Ms. Adams' same-sex marriage. Earth Vision did so pursuant to a policy that reflects its sincerely held religious belief that marriage is a Biblical covenant between a man and a woman. Ms. Adams filed the instant lawsuit, claiming that Earth Vision unlawfully discriminated against her in violation of the Washington Law Against Discrimination ("WLAD") for sex, sexual orientation, and marital status discrimination, which incudes a prohibition against discrimination in employment based on gender and/or sexual orientation. The church has filed a motion for summary judgment arguing that compliance with the law violates its right to free exercise of religion. How should the court rule on the Church's defense? A. In favor of the church because a religious institution has the right to select its own employees without government interference.

B. In favor of the church because the failure to allow the church to rescind the applicant's job offer fails strict scrutiny.

C. In favor of the applicant because Ministerial exception does not shield employers from state anti-discrimination laws.

D. In favor of the applicant because an Information Technology technician is not involved in the church's core religious mission.

8. A State X law makes it illegal to use cartoon characters in advertisements for any tobacco products because of its concern that such advertisements will contribute to minors using tobacco products, which is prohibited by law. A tobacco company, DownUnder Smoking, that is based in Australia uses a Kangaroo cartoon figure in its advertisements because it believes that customers will associate a Kangaroo with Australia. One such advertisement was shown on TV on a station that broadcast to California, among other places. DownUnder Smoking was charged with violation of the State X law. DownUnder Smoking argues in defense that it engaged in conduct protected under the First Amendment. How should the court rule? A. For DownUnder Smoking because the government cannot prove that the law is narrowly tailored to further a compelling state interest.

B. For DownUnder Smoking because it uses the Kangaroo for reasons wholly separate from appealing to minors.

C. For the State because the advertisement is not entitled to First Amendment protection.

D. For the state because the regulation is narrowly tailored to serve a substantial governmental interest.

9. Hagar was a candidate for school board president. She was running against a candidate who was facing a corruption investigation related to taking bribes in exchange for better grades for students. Hagar had previously been convicted of fraud, but she believed that the records for that conviction had been expunged. During a campaign speech, she stated that "she is the choice for honesty because she has never taken any bribe nor committed any fraud in her life." State X has a law that that makes it unlawful to "intentionally make a false statement for purpose of influencing voters in any public election." State X charges Hagar with violating the law. Hagar asserts a defense that the law is unconstitutional under the First Amendment. How should the court rule? A. In favor of Hagar because the regulation fails strict scrutiny.

B. In favor of Hagar because the state cannot establish actual malice.

C. In favor of the State because false speech has no protection under the First Amendment.

D. In favor of the State because it has a rational basis to prohibit false speech in an election.

10. In the runup to an election that included a proposition restricting LGBT reading material to minors, an organization, Love4All, supporting LGBT rights created a video celebrating LGBT relationships. It included several adults engaging in same-sex romantic and sexual activity. The video was shown in a very conservative town dominated by a religion that believes LBGT relationships are an affront to God's laws. The President of Love4All was charged with violating the town's obscenity statute, which prohibits the distribution of material considered obscenity. The jury was properly instructed on the definition of obscenity as set forth in federal case law. The jury found in favor of the state and the President was convicted. If the President of Love4All wishes to raise a First Amendment defense on appeal, what is the best argument? A. The video does not appeal to the prurient interest in sex.

B. The video is not patently offensive

C. The video has serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value

D. The regulation is a content-based restriction on speech. 11. A group seeking to raise awareness of female mortality during birth made a demonstration across the street from the white house. The group put out a number of folding chairs, and put a photo on each that depicted a women who had died in childbirth in the last year. After a half hour that including speeches and pictures of the demonstration, the group put the chairs away and left. The President has recently suffered criticism for not sufficiently funding pre-natal and birth care for women. After learning of the protest, the President ordered the participants to be charged with violating a statute that prohibits erecting any furniture or structures within 100 feet of the White House. The group members have raised the defense based on the First Amendment free speech rights. How should the court rule? A. For the group protestors because the government lacks a sufficiently important government interest and the incidental restriction on First Amendment freedoms is greater than essential to further than interest

B. For the group protestors because the government's action is not necessary to further a compelling government interest

C. For the government because the government's regulation concerned conduct and not speech

D. For the government because the group's activities in this context fall outside first amendment protection 12. An anti-abortion protest was held outside a hospital that provided for reproductive care. The group made speeches and carried signs communicating their message that life begins and conception and all abortion is murder. When a doctor exited the maternity ward at the hospital, a protestor named Ronald pointed at the doctor and said "There's one of the murderers now! Let's go get him and beat her until she knows what it feels like to have their life in the hands of someone else." Right after Ronald made the statement, a police officer arrested him for solicitation of assault. In the ensuing court case, Ronald asserts that his speech was protected by the First Amendment. How should the court rule? A. For Ronald because no one acted on the statements he made.

B. For Ronald because he was engaging in political advocacy

C. For the government because he was advocating a violation of law

D. For the government because he urged the crowd to beat her while she was in its presence.

13. A state law provides some funding for public parks on a per capita basis from general state revenues, which primarily come from the state income and sales taxes. The law also provides that any additional funding must come from locally levied real estate taxes. This results in a large disparity in funding for public parks because some localities have significantly higher property values than others. Moreover, generally racial minorities tends to be more represented in localities with lower property values. Hispanic residents of a city with low real estate values, and thus low real estate tax revenue, have challenged the law on the ground that it violates the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause. Which of the following best states the burden of persuasion in this action? A. The state must show that the law is narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling government interest.

B. The government must show that the law is substantially related to an important interest.

C. The residents must demonstrate that the law is not rationally related to any legitimate state interest.

D. The residents must demonstrate that the law is not substantially related to an important state interest. 14. A city filed an eminent domain proceeding in order to obtain a section of houses that are situated next to an amusement park. The city has a plan to increase tourism by providing more accommodations for tourists to stay, to attend the amusement park and inject money into the local economy. The city plans to sell the houses to a hotel chain, who will demolish the houses and build a luxury hotel in their place. The owners have challenged the city's exercise of eminent domain on the ground that it is an unconstitutional taking. Are the owners likely to prevail? A. No, because a property owner can challenge an exercise of eminent domain only on the ground of the sufficiency of the compensation.

B. No, because the City's purpose qualifies as public use.

C. Yes, because a public entity cannot seize property of one person in order to transfer that property to another private party.

D. Yes, because the city's actions would deprive the owners of all economic use of their property. 15. A teacher who was certified to teach public school in one state was convicted in state court of inappropriate sexual contact with a minor. Under state law, such an offense required revocation of a teacher's teaching certification. After it received an official notification of the teacher's conviction, the state education board revoked the teacher's certification, without affording the teacher any opportunity for a hearing. The teacher has sued the board in state court to set aside the revocation, alleging violation of the right to due process of law because the board did not provide any in person hearing before revoking the certification. Which of the following is the strongest argument in support of the state education board? A. The adjudicative facts necessary to revoke the teaching certification was determined in the state court proceeding resulting the in the criminal conviction, and therefore there is no risk of erroneous deprivation.

B. A teacher's certification to teach is a privilege, and not a right, and therefore the teacher did not have a right to due process before losing that certification.

C. Due process requires a balancing of interests, and here the state's interests in preventing child abuse outweigh the teacher's interest in a more extensive procedure.

D. The Constitution requires the education board to give full faith and credit to the teacher's criminal conviction.

16. A state law allows injured parties to recover compensatory damages against any person who makes any public statement containing false or misleading information about a person's occupation. An owner of a car garage claimed in an advertisement that a competitor took twice as long to fix cars on average than the owner's car garage. The claim was based on erroneous information, which the owner took from one comment from a disgruntled customer, but the owner did not do any diligence to confirm the information before making the statement. The competitor has filed a complaint against the car manufacturer, seeking compensatory damages based on the state law. Which of the following is the car manufacturer's best defense based on the First Amendment. A. Its statement about the safety record was made without malice.

B. The statement about the safety record was non-protected commercial speech.

C. The state law is a prior restraint.

D. The state law is overbroad.

17. A bar owner has applied for a zoning permit to open a nightclub specializing in Drag Shows in the commercial center of the city. (Drag Shows are a type of entertainment where artists, most commonly men, present themselves in exaggeratedly feminine ways as part of their performance.) An organization of residents began an intensive lobbying effort to persuade the city to deny the owner a permit to operate Drag Shows in any time or in any place in the city. The owner has sued the city in federal court, seeking an injunction that would prohibit the city council from considering the organization's views, on the ground that if the organization is successful, the owner's First and Fourteenth Amendment rights would be violated. Should the Court dismiss the owner's action? A. No, because Drag Shows are expressive speech protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments.

B. No, because the organization does not seek a reasonable time, place, and manner restriction, but instead seeks to ban all Drag Shows in the city regardless of time or place.

C. Yes, because the First and Fourteenth Amendments do not protect obscenity.

D. Yes, because the action isn't ripe.

18. To improve the safety of houses for children, a city proposed an ordinance requiring that all newly built houses place all electrical outlets about 5 feet from the floor, install safety railings for all stairs and all accessible ledges higher than 10 feet, provide ladders or stairs outside of any window above the ground floor, and certify that no lead paint is exposed. Multiple construction companies have opposed the ordinance. They have argued that the requirements would decrease the number of low-income housing units because the additional expenditures would result in higher housing prices and may be too high to recoup from low-income house buyers. Without denying these effects, the city enacted the ordinance. One construction company who has focused on low-income housing has sued the city, claiming that the ordinance is unconstitutional on its face. Which of the following best states the burden of persuasion on this action? A. The city must demonstrate that the ordinance is necessary to serve a compelling state interest, because it adversely affects the fundamental right to build and sell houses in a way that is most efficient and profitable.

B. The city must demonstrate that the ordinance is necessary to serve a compelling state interest, because it will discriminate against low-income residents seeking affordable housing.

C. The city must demonstrate that the ordinance is not substantially related to an important state interest, because low-income residents are more likely to be female than male.

D. The plaintiff must demonstrate that there is no rational relationship between the ordinance and any legitimate state interest because the ordinance regulates economic activity of a type normally presumed to be within state regulatory authority.

19. State law provides that parents have a right to home-school their children. However, it authorizes the State Board of Education to establish curriculum and testing requirements, and also to require periodic reports from the parents on the progress of their children's education. If the requirements are not met, the State Board of Education may withdraw permission for a parent to home-school their children so long as the parent is given notice of the decision and an opportunity to be heard. A parent refused to submit periodic reports to the State Board of Education. After a length process of warnings, notice, and a hearing on the issue, the State Board withdrew permission for the parents to home school their children, and required that the children report to public school the following school year. The parents have filed a lawsuit arguing that the law was unconstitutional as applied to them. How should the court rule? A. For the parents because they have a fundamental right to care, custody, and education of their children.

B. For the parents because the law is overinclusive.

C. For the School Board because the law is the least restrictive means of serving the compelling government interest of ensuring its minor citizens are provided an adequate education.

D. For the School Board because the law strikes the proper balance between the interests of the state and the interests of the parents.

20.

Faced with more limited energy resources, droughts from climate change, and the environmental impact of population growth, the federal government enacted a law that prohibited any person from having a child without a license. In order to apply for a license, potential parents had to submit to a DNA test and also engage in a length application process to determine whether sufficient resources would be available for the potential child. Deborah applied for a license, but was denied. Deborah has now filed a lawsuit in federal court seeking a declaration that the licensing law is unconstitutional. How should the Court rule? A. For Deborah because the law violates Debroah's right to Equal Protection clause because it limits pregnancy, which is only women can do.

B. For Deborah because the law violates Deborah's right to due process because parenting is right so fundamental that it cannot be infringed even though it is not specifically addressed in the Constitution.

C. For the US because the right to become a parent is not specifically enumerated in the constitution.

D. For the US because the government provided sufficient due process through the application process before depriving her of a right. 21.

Matt applied to the orchestra at a public university in State A, but was not accepted. Matt is Caucasian. 50% of the members of the orchestra are Asian-American, even though Asian Americans only make up 10% of State A's population. Matt has filed a lawsuit against the university arguing that his equal protection rights were violated because the proportion of Asian Americans in the university is so much higher than the State's general population. The university has filed a motion to dismiss alleging that Matt has not shown a proper basis for a claim of equal protection based on race. How should the Court rule? A. For Matt because circumstantial evidence indicates that law passed with discriminatory purpose.

B. For Matt because the University cannot show that the disproportionate selection of Asian Americans is narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling government interest.

C. For the University because it has a rational basis to consider race as a factor in selecting applicants to the orchestra.

D. For the University because Matt has failed to make the necessary showing to establish purposeful discrimination on the basis of race. 22. State X enacted a law that denied a pharmacist license to any person who had been treated for drug addiction in the past. Betty had been treated for drug addiction as a teenager, but has been sober for the last 10 years. After Betty was denied a pharmacist license based on the law, Betty challenged the constitutionality of the law in court, arguing that the law violated her right to Equal Protection. Betty presented credible evidence that persons who have been sober for more than two years, especially where the drug use occurred before the person was an adult, are less likely to abuse drugs than a person who had never sought treatment for addiction. How should the Court rule on Betty's constitutional challenge? A. For Betty because the government cannot show that the law is narrowly tailored to further a compelling government interest.

B. For Betty because she has presented sufficient evidence to challenge the state's assumption that previous addiction leads to misuse of pharmaceuticals.

C. For the State because it is not irrational for the state to believe that persons previously addicted to drugs present a greater danger of misuing pharmaceuticals than those who had not been treated for drug addition in the past.

D. For the State because Betty has not set forth sufficient evidence of discriminatory intent.

23. Mr. Greene was elected as the first African American mayor of City X. He has decided to hold his swearing in ceremony at his family's church, which is a majority black church in the city. Ms. Smith is a white resident of City X who objects to holding the government ceremony at a religious site. Ms. Smith has filed a lawsuit in federal court claiming that the mayor's planned ceremony is unconstitutional. How should the court rule? A. For Mr. Greene if Mr. Greene can sufficiently establish that past mayors have historically held similar ceremonies in churches or similar religious locations.

B. For Mr. Greene so long as Mr. Greene's prepared remarks are neutral as to religion.

C. For Ms. Smith because Mr. Greene cannot prove that holding the ceremony is necessary to further a compelling government interest.

D. For Ms. Smith because holding the ceremony at a church fosters an excessive government entanglement in religion.

24. The White Nationalist Fan Club (WNFC) is an organization bringing together like-minded individuals who believe that the United States was formed as a white nation and that promotion of the white race is essential for the future of the country. Bert is an African American who disagrees with the principle of white nationalism. He believes that morality and the Constitution support the ideal of a racially diverse and harmonious country. Bert has applied to join the WNFC, but his application was denied. Bert has now filed a lawsuit seeking a court order compelling the WNFC to admit him. Bert has relied on a state statute that prohibits discrimination in any club with more than 15 members on the basis of race. The WNFC has claimed that being compelled to accept Bert as a member violates its First Amendment rights. How should the court rule? A. For Bert because preventing discrimination by private individuals is a compelling governmental interest.

B. For Bert because addressing discrimination is one of the traditional roles of state government.

C. For WNFC because the equal protection clause does not apply to private clubs.

D. For WNFC because the forced inclusion of Bert as a member would significantly affect WNFC's advocacy of white nationalism. 25.

Ninety percent of the high school students in State X attend public schools. The other 10% attend private schools, some of which are religious and some of which are not. The Andersen Academy is a Christian-based private school. 60% of the funding for the school comes from the state government through a system of vouchers, which allow any student to use funds to attend any school of their choice. The State does not dictate any aspect of the curriculum, but does require that the teachers be certified instructors. Margaret was denied admission to the Anderson Academy based on the fact that she is Jewish. Margaret has sued the school as violating her fourteenth Amendment constitutional rights. Which is the State's best defense?

A. The ministerial exception prevents enforcement of the Equal Protection clause against the Anderson Academy.

B. It had a right to reject individuals who oppose its views under its right to freedom of association.

C. Education is not an exclusive government function

D. The school's religious criteria for students is substantially related to an important interest in promoting religious freedom.