Your modern, mobile-friendly practice test platform

HiSET Social Studies Practice Test

53 total questions (5 free)

Question 1 of 5

Extract:

Selected Court Cases in United States History
Commonwealth v. Hunt (1842)
1 In the 1790s workers began forming unions to bargain collectively with employers for higher wages and other benefits. Employers generally resisted these efforts. This decision, handed down by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, strengthened the union movement by ruling that workers had the right to form a union and that doing so did not constitute a criminal conspiracy against their employer.
Muller v. Oregon (1908)
2 In the early 1900s, Progressive reformers in Oregon overcame business apposition and helped to pass a law protecting working women. The law prohibited businesses from requiring women to work for more than ten hours a day. The U.S. Supreme Court supported these Progressive reformers by declaring that the law was constitutional.
Schenck v. United States (1919)
3 After the United States entered World War I, Congress passed the Espionage Act of 1917 to punish antiwar behavior and ben antiwar materials from the mail, It also passed the Sedition Act of 1918, which outlawed speech, writing, and behavior that the government deemed dangerous to the war effort. Charles Schenck was convicted of mailing antiwar pamphlets that urged men to seek repeal of the Conscription Act. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld his conviction, ruling that the First Amendment's right to free speech did not include speech that was "a clear and present danger to the safety of the country."

The U.S. Supreme Court considered a case in which a political activist was jailed for stating publicly that World War I was a rich man's war but a poor man's fight. To which case is this case most similar?

Correct Answer: C

Rationale: The case described involves a political activist jailed for antiwar speech, which aligns closely with Schenck v. United States, where Charles Schenck was convicted for mailing antiwar pamphlets. The Supreme Court upheld his conviction, ruling that speech posing a 'clear and present danger' was not protected under the First Amendment, similar to the activist's situation. Commonwealth v. Hunt deals with labor unions, Muller v. Oregon with labor laws for women, and Brown v. Board of Education with school desegregation, none of which involve free speech issues related to antiwar activism.

Question 2 of 5

Extract:

Selected Court Cases in United States History
Commonwealth v. Hunt (1842)
1 In the 1790s workers began forming unions to bargain collectively with employers for higher wages and other benefits. Employers generally resisted these efforts. This decision, handed down by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, strengthened the union movement by ruling that workers had the right to form a union and that doing so did not constitute a criminal conspiracy against their employer.
Muller v. Oregon (1908)
2 In the early 1900s, Progressive reformers in Oregon overcame business apposition and helped to pass a law protecting working women. The law prohibited businesses from requiring women to work for more than ten hours a day. The U.S. Supreme Court supported these Progressive reformers by declaring that the law was constitutional.
Schenck v. United States (1919)
3 After the United States entered World War I, Congress passed the Espionage Act of 1917 to punish antiwar behavior and ben antiwar materials from the mail, It also passed the Sedition Act of 1918, which outlawed speech, writing, and behavior that the government deemed dangerous to the war effort. Charles Schenck was convicted of mailing antiwar pamphlets that urged men to seek repeal of the Conscription Act. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld his conviction, ruling that the First Amendment's right to free speech did not include speech that was "a clear and present danger to the safety of the country."

Which of these pairs of cases deals with First Amendment rights?

Correct Answer: C

Rationale: The First Amendment protects freedoms like speech and religion. Schenck v. United States directly addresses free speech, as the Court ruled on the legality of antiwar pamphlets. Engel v. Vitale (though not detailed in the document) is a well-known case addressing the First Amendment's Establishment Clause, prohibiting school-sponsored prayer. Commonwealth v. Hunt and Muller v. Oregon focus on labor issues, and Brown v. Board of Education addresses equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment, not First Amendment rights.

Question 3 of 5

Extract:

Selected Court Cases in United States History
Commonwealth v. Hunt (1842)
1 In the 1790s workers began forming unions to bargain collectively with employers for higher wages and other benefits. Employers generally resisted these efforts. This decision, handed down by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, strengthened the union movement by ruling that workers had the right to form a union and that doing so did not constitute a criminal conspiracy against their employer.
Muller v. Oregon (1908)
2 In the early 1900s, Progressive reformers in Oregon overcame business apposition and helped to pass a law protecting working women. The law prohibited businesses from requiring women to work for more than ten hours a day. The U.S. Supreme Court supported these Progressive reformers by declaring that the law was constitutional.
Schenck v. United States (1919)
3 After the United States entered World War I, Congress passed the Espionage Act of 1917 to punish antiwar behavior and ben antiwar materials from the mail, It also passed the Sedition Act of 1918, which outlawed speech, writing, and behavior that the government deemed dangerous to the war effort. Charles Schenck was convicted of mailing antiwar pamphlets that urged men to seek repeal of the Conscription Act. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld his conviction, ruling that the First Amendment's right to free speech did not include speech that was "a clear and present danger to the safety of the country."

Assume that the state of Kansas passed a law limiting the number of hours teenagers could work on farms, and the state's farmers challenged the law. The decision in which of these cases could be cited in support of Kansas's law?

Correct Answer: B

Rationale: Muller v. Oregon upheld a law limiting women's working hours, establishing a precedent for state laws regulating labor conditions to protect specific groups. A Kansas law limiting teenagers' farm work hours is similar, as it regulates labor for a vulnerable group. Commonwealth v. Hunt addresses union rights, Brown v. Board of Education deals with desegregation, and Engel v. Vitale concerns school prayer, none of which are relevant to labor hour restrictions.

Question 4 of 5

Extract:

Selected Court Cases in United States History
Commonwealth v. Hunt (1842)
1 In the 1790s workers began forming unions to bargain collectively with employers for higher wages and other benefits. Employers generally resisted these efforts. This decision, handed down by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, strengthened the union movement by ruling that workers had the right to form a union and that doing so did not constitute a criminal conspiracy against their employer.
Muller v. Oregon (1908)
2 In the early 1900s, Progressive reformers in Oregon overcame business apposition and helped to pass a law protecting working women. The law prohibited businesses from requiring women to work for more than ten hours a day. The U.S. Supreme Court supported these Progressive reformers by declaring that the law was constitutional.
Schenck v. United States (1919)
3 After the United States entered World War I, Congress passed the Espionage Act of 1917 to punish antiwar behavior and ben antiwar materials from the mail, It also passed the Sedition Act of 1918, which outlawed speech, writing, and behavior that the government deemed dangerous to the war effort. Charles Schenck was convicted of mailing antiwar pamphlets that urged men to seek repeal of the Conscription Act. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld his conviction, ruling that the First Amendment's right to free speech did not include speech that was "a clear and present danger to the safety of the country."

Which of these statements best describes the difference between Commonwealth v. Hunt and Muller v. Oregon?

Correct Answer: D

Rationale: Both Commonwealth v. Hunt and Muller v. Oregon address labor issues. Commonwealth v. Hunt legalized labor unions, ruling they were not criminal conspiracies. Muller v. Oregon upheld a law limiting women's work hours, supporting state regulation of labor conditions. Option C is incorrect because Muller v. Oregon does not give businesses rights to challenge unions. Options A and B are incorrect as they mischaracterize the cases' focus.

Question 5 of 5

Extract:

Selected Court Cases in United States History
Commonwealth v. Hunt (1842)
1 In the 1790s workers began forming unions to bargain collectively with employers for higher wages and other benefits. Employers generally resisted these efforts. This decision, handed down by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, strengthened the union movement by ruling that workers had the right to form a union and that doing so did not constitute a criminal conspiracy against their employer.
Muller v. Oregon (1908)
2 In the early 1900s, Progressive reformers in Oregon overcame business apposition and helped to pass a law protecting working women. The law prohibited businesses from requiring women to work for more than ten hours a day. The U.S. Supreme Court supported these Progressive reformers by declaring that the law was constitutional.
Schenck v. United States (1919)
3 After the United States entered World War I, Congress passed the Espionage Act of 1917 to punish antiwar behavior and ben antiwar materials from the mail, It also passed the Sedition Act of 1918, which outlawed speech, writing, and behavior that the government deemed dangerous to the war effort. Charles Schenck was convicted of mailing antiwar pamphlets that urged men to seek repeal of the Conscription Act. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld his conviction, ruling that the First Amendment's right to free speech did not include speech that was "a clear and present danger to the safety of the country."

What was the impact of the Brandenburg v. Ohio ruling on an individual's right to freedom of speech?

Correct Answer: A

Rationale: Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), though not detailed in the document, is a landmark case refining the 'clear and present danger' test from Schenck. It ruled that speech is protected unless it incites imminent lawless action and is likely to produce such action, thus expanding free speech protections compared to Schenck's broader restrictions. This allows more freedom, making A correct. It did not create restrictions (B), affect only racial speech (D), or have no effect (C).

Upgrade to unlock all 48 remaining questions. Get access to detailed explanations and unlimited practice.

Upgrade to Premium