Questions: 3. How that illegal prison sentences on all street entertainers without a trial would likely violate procedural due process: a. True b. False 4. A student is ticketed for school-based on an allegation of cheating, but that student does not have an opportunity to present his case to the dean. Is likely a violation of: Select all that apply. procedural due process substantive due process free speech equal protection 7. A state law that bans legitimate children from claiming child support from their parents violates the equal protection clause. a. True b. False c. Can't prove equal protection d. fair content of regulations

The answer is a. True

Procedural due process requires that individuals are given notice and an opportunity to be heard before being deprived of life, liberty, or property. Imposing prison sentences on street entertainers without a trial would violate this principle, as it denies them the opportunity to defend themselves in a court of law.

This option is incorrect because it suggests that such actions would not violate procedural due process, which is not the case.

The answer is procedural due process.

This is likely a violation because the student was not given an opportunity to present his case, which is a fundamental aspect of procedural due process. It ensures fair procedures when the government burdens or deprives an individual of life, liberty, or property.

This is not directly applicable here, as substantive due process deals with the government's power to regulate certain activities, not the procedures used.

This is not relevant to the situation described, as it pertains to the right to express ideas and information.

This is not directly applicable, as the issue is about the fairness of the procedure rather than discrimination or unequal treatment.

The answer is a. True

The equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment requires that individuals in similar situations be treated equally by the law. A state law that prevents legitimate children from claiming child support from their parents would likely violate this clause, as it discriminates against a specific group without a valid justification.

This option is incorrect because it suggests that the law does not violate the equal protection clause, which it likely does.

This option is incorrect because the violation of equal protection can be demonstrated by the discriminatory nature of the law.

This option is not relevant to the question, as it does not address the issue of equal protection.