Question

25 Points

What did the Supreme Court decide in Vernonia v. Acton?
a.Students were required to submit to all drug tests.
b.Drug tests of athletes were reasonable searches.
c.A school could unreasonably seize students’ property.
d.The school had violated the students’ constitutional rights.

Which was a finding by the Supreme Court in New Jersey v. T.L.O.?
a.The Fourth Amendment does not apply to students.
b.Students are protected from unreasonable searches.
c.A school’s search of a student’s purse is unreasonable.
d.Students are not required to follow the rules of the school.

Supporters of affirmative action argued that the programs
a.addressed discrimination that had occurred in the past.
b.helped provide equal opportunities for minority students.
c.were a form of “reverse discrimination” but were still acceptable.
d.were intended as a privilege for minority students.

Allen Bakke, the student involved in Regents v. Bakke, argued that
a.minority students with equivalent test scores were admitted to the school.
b.medical school admissions should consider race as a factor.
c.the school’s affirmative action program did not address past discrimination.
d.the medical school denied his application because of racial quotas.

Answer 1

hello maxim!

Step-by-step explanation:

What did the Supreme Court decide in Vernonia v. Acton?

b.Drug tests of athletes were reasonable searches.

Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton, case in which the U.S. Supreme Court on June 26, 1995, ruled (6–3) that an Oregon school board's random drug-testing policy for student athletes was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.

Which was a finding by the Supreme Court in New Jersey v. T.L.O.?

b.Students are protected from unreasonable searches.

In a juvenile court, T.L.O. argued that her Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures had been violated. The court sided with the school, and T.L.O. took her case to the New Jersey Supreme Court, which later found that the search was unreasonable and the evidence could not be used.

Supporters of affirmative action argued that the programs

b.helped provide equal opportunities for minority students.

Supporters of affirmative action argued that the programs. addressed discrimination that had occurred in the past. helped provide equal opportunities for minority students. were a form of “reverse discrimination” but were still acceptable.

Allen Bakke, the student involved in Regents v. Bakke, argued that

d.the medical school denied his application because of racial quotas

In Regents of University of California v. Bakke (1978), the Supreme Court ruled that a university's use of racial "quotas" in its admissions process was unconstitutional, but a school's use of "affirmative action" to accept more minority applicants was constitutional in some circumstances.

The case involved the admissions practices of the Medical School of the University of California at Davis. The medical school reserved 16 out of 100 seats in its entering class for minorities, including "Blacks," "Chicanos," "Asians," and "American Indians."

The rigid admissions quota was administered by a special school committee. Allan Bakke, a white applicant, was twice denied admission to the medical school even though his MCAT scores, GPA, and benchmark scores were "significantly higher" than those of some minority applicants recently admitted.

Answer 2

1. The answer to the question is B. Drug tests of the athletes were reasonable searches.
2. The answer to the question is B. Students are protected from the unreasonable searches.
3. The answer to the question is B. Helped provide equal opportunities for minority students.
4. The answer to the question is D. The medical school denied his application because of racial quotas.