PracticeQuiz content is free on an ad-supported model.
Unfortunately, we can't support ad blocker usage because of the impact on our servers. If you'd like to continue, please disable your ad blocker and reload page.
School years are the time when the physical, psychological, and addictive effects of drugs are most severe . . . . Deterring drug use by our nation's schoolchildren is at least as important as enhancing efficient enforcement of the nation's laws against the importation of drugs.
- Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority in Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton (1995)
By the reasoning of today's decision, the millions of these students who participate in interscholastic sports, an overwhelming majority of whom have given school officials no reason whatsoever to suspect they use drugs at school, are open to an intrusive bodily harm . . . . Many schools, like many parents, prefer to trust their children unless given reason to do otherwise.
- Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, writing in dissent
In Justice O’Connor’s view, the school district’s drug-testing policy violates students’ constitutional protection against:
The Supreme Court today upheld the validity of the 1990 census, ruling unanimously that the federal government had no constitutional obligation to adjust the results to correct an acknowledged undercount in big cities and among minorities . . . . At the core of the legal challenge to the 1990 census was the racially disparate undercount, the existence of which no one disputed. The census missed about 2 percent of the population as a whole, some four million people. But it missed 4.8 percent of the Black population and 5.2 percent of the Hispanic population.
- The New York Times, 3/21/1996
Why might it be argued that the census was unfair?
We admit that in . . . ordinary times the defendants . . . would have been within their constitutional rights. But the character of every act depends upon the circumstances in which it is done. The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic. . . . The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the evils that Congress has a right to prevent.
- Justice Holmes, delivering the majority opinion of the Court
According to the Supreme Court decision in this case, free speech should NOT be protected when it
We admit that in . . . ordinary times the defendants . . . would have been within their constitutional rights. But the character of every act depends upon the circumstances in which it is done. The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic. . . . The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the evils that Congress has a right to prevent.
- Justice Holmes, delivering the majority opinion of the Court
What argument is the Supreme Court making in this decision?
We admit that in . . . ordinary times the defendants . . . would have been within their constitutional rights. But the character of every act depends upon the circumstances in which it is done. The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic. . . . The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the evils that Congress has a right to prevent.
- Justice Holmes, delivering the majority opinion of the Court
The Supreme Court decision in Schenck v. The United States, quoted above, involves an interpretation of which of the following parts of the Constitution?
