Questions: Mapp v. Ohio extended the Fourth Amendment prohibition of unreasonable search and seizure to All law enforcement officers Undercover officers Federal officers State National Guards Which of the following would be illegal under the First Amendment? Taking pictures of police officers performing their duties. Refusing to stop photographing a police incident Obstructing traffic in order to record a protest. Taking pictures or videos of transportation facilities such as a train station The Civil Rights Act of 1866 became the Amendment 14th 13th 10th 18th

Mapp v. Ohio extended the Fourth Amendment prohibition of unreasonable search and seizure to
All law enforcement officers
Undercover officers
Federal officers
State National Guards

Which of the following would be illegal under the First Amendment?
Taking pictures of police officers performing their duties.
Refusing to stop photographing a police incident
Obstructing traffic in order to record a protest.
Taking pictures or videos of transportation facilities such as a train station

The Civil Rights Act of 1866 became the Amendment
14th
13th
10th
18th
Transcript text: Mapp v. Ohio extended the Fourth Amendment prohibition of unreasonable search and seizure to $\qquad$ All law enforcement officers Undercover officers Federal officers State National Guards Which of the following would be illegal under the First Amendment? Taking pictures of police officers performing their duties. Refusing to stop photographing a police incident Obstructing traffic in order to record a protest. Taking pictures or videos of transportation facilities such as a train station The Civil Rights Act of 1866 became the $\qquad$ Amendment 14th 13th 10th 18th
failed

Solution

failed
failed
Answer

The answer is State National Guards

Explanation
Option 1: All law enforcement officers

Mapp v. Ohio primarily extended the Fourth Amendment's protections to state law enforcement officers, not specifically to all law enforcement officers, which would include federal officers who were already covered.

Option 2: Undercover officers

The case did not specifically address undercover officers; it was more about the general application of the Fourth Amendment to state actions.

Option 3: Federal officers

Federal officers were already subject to the Fourth Amendment due to previous rulings, so Mapp v. Ohio did not extend new protections to them.

Option 4: State National Guards

While the case primarily affected state law enforcement, the term "State National Guards" is not typically associated with law enforcement in the context of search and seizure laws. However, the ruling did extend protections to state-level actions, which could include state entities like the National Guard when acting in a law enforcement capacity.


Answer

The answer is Obstructing traffic in order to record a protest.

Explanation
Option 1: Taking pictures of police officers performing their duties.

This is generally protected under the First Amendment as a form of free speech and public oversight.

Option 2: Refusing to stop photographing a police incident

This is also generally protected under the First Amendment, provided it does not interfere with police operations.

Option 3: Obstructing traffic in order to record a protest.

This could be considered illegal as it involves obstructing public ways, which is not protected under the First Amendment.

Option 4: Taking pictures or videos of transportation facilities such as a train station

This is generally legal unless specific security measures or laws prohibit it for safety reasons.


Answer

The answer is 14th

Explanation
Option 1: 14th

The Civil Rights Act of 1866 was a precursor to the 14th Amendment, which granted citizenship and equal protection under the law to all persons born or naturalized in the United States.

Option 2: 13th

The 13th Amendment abolished slavery, which was a separate issue from the Civil Rights Act of 1866.

Option 3: 10th

The 10th Amendment deals with states' rights and powers not delegated to the federal government, unrelated to the Civil Rights Act of 1866.

Option 4: 18th

The 18th Amendment established the prohibition of alcohol, which is unrelated to civil rights legislation.

Was this solution helpful?
failed
Unhelpful
failed
Helpful