94%(454)425 out of 454 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 20 - 22 out of 105 pages.
52.(p. 40-41)When Bad Frog Brewery, Inc., placed a label on their product showing a frog with unwebbed fingers with its middle finger extended, New York State sued to prohibit the use of the label claiming it to be obscene and claiming an interest in protecting the state's children. The court found: A. for Bad Frog because children cannot purchase beer so any exposure would be incidentalB.for Bad Frog because the labels did not concern an unlawful activity and the state did not prove its interest inprotecting children from vulgarityC. for New York State because once purchased, the labels would be exposed in refrigerators or drunk in rooms while children were presentD. for New York State because they proved a substantial effort to advance a valid state interest amounting to more than "not merely the removal of a few grains of sand from the beach of vulgarity"
The court did not find a substantial effort to advance a valid state interest so the Central Hudson test was not met.53.(p. 31, 45)If Alabama passes a statute specifically permitting high school girls to try out and play on varsity high school football teams if qualified, that statute would be reviewed using: 54.(p. 30)Treaties: 55.(p. 32)The power of preemption is derived from: 56.(p. 33)In Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc., et al., Cipollone sued based on state laws regulating advertising andpromotional activities in the tobacco industry. A. Cipollone won because the state laws were specific and were violated by the defendantB. Cipollone won because although there were federal laws regulating promotion and advertising activities regarding tobacco products, they specifically authorized supplemental state laws negating preemptionC. Cipollone lost because the federal and state laws conflicted, negating both, so the court had no basis to make its decisionD.Cipollone lost because he relied on State law which was preempted by federal lawWhen federal law is passed and it clearly intends to preempt state law in a particular area, the state law will be overruled and null.