还没有登录哦！
[Reading Comprehension]
试题详情
文章：
| Line | In Winters v. United States (1908), the Supreme |
| Court held that the right to use waters flowing through | |
| or adjacent to the Fort Belknap Indian Reservation | |
| was reserved to American Indians by the treaty | |
| (5) | establishing the reservation. Although this treaty did |
| not mention water rights, the Court ruled that the | |
| federal government, when it created the reservation, | |
| intended to deal fairly with American Indians by | |
| reserving for them the waters without which their | |
| (10) | lands would have been useless. Later decisions, citing |
| Winters, established that courts can find federal rights | |
| to reserve water for particular purposes if (1) the | |
| land in question lies within an enclave under exclusive | |
| federal jurisdiction, (2) the land has been formally | |
| (15) | withdrawn from federal public lands—i.e., withdrawn |
| from the stock of federal lands available for private | |
| use under federal land use laws—and set aside | |
| or reserved, and (3) the circumstances reveal the | |
| government intended to reserve water as well as land | |
| (20) | when establishing the reservation. |
| Some American Indian tribes have also established | |
| water rights through the courts based on their | |
| traditional diversion and use of certain waters prior | |
| to the United States’ acquisition of sovereignty. For | |
| (25) | example, the Rio Grande pueblos already existed |
| when the United States acquired sovereignty over | |
| New Mexico in 1848. Although they at that time | |
| became part of the United States, the pueblo lands | |
| never formally constituted a part of federal public | |
| (30) | lands; in any event, no treaty, statute, or executive |
| order has ever designated or withdrawn the pueblos | |
| from public lands as American Indian reservations. | |
| This fact, however, has not barred application of the | |
| Winters doctrine. What constitutes an American Indian | |
| (35) | reservation is a question of practice, not of legal |
| definition, and the pueblos have always been treated | |
| as reservations by the United States. This pragmatic | |
| approach is buttressed by Arizona v. California (1963), | |
| wherein the Supreme Court indicated that the manner | |
| (40) | in which any type of federal reservation is created |
| does not affect the application to it of the Winters | |
| doctrine. Therefore, the reserved water rights of | |
| Pueblo Indians have priority over other citizens’ water | |
| rights as of 1848, the year in which pueblos must be | |
| (45) | considered to have become reservations. |
题目：
The passage suggests that the legal rights of citizens other than American Indians to the use of water flowing into the Rio Grande pueblos are
选项:
A、guaranteed by the precedent set in Arizona v. California
B、abolished by the Winters doctrine
C、deferred to the Pueblo Indians whenever treaties explicitly require this
D、guaranteed by federal land-use laws
E、limited by the prior claims of the Pueblo Indians
答案:
E
提问：
OG2020 509。请英吉或王文静老师回答。这道题我读的时候因为时间不够，没有再回原文定位，直接选了A，好像原文38行提过。但是看答案E后还是不知道怎么选出来。这个prior claims指的是什么？American Indians是第一段出现的，但是E 中Pueblo Indians 又是第二段出现的，如何定位？
解答：
点赞0
阅读937
提问：
OG2020 509。请英吉或王文静老师回答。这道题我读的时候因为时间不够，没有再回原文定位，直接选了A，好像原文38行提过。但是看答案E后还是不知道怎么选出来。这个prior claims指的是什么？American Indians是第一段出现的，但是E 中Pueblo Indians 又是第二段出现的，如何定位？
解答：
点赞0
阅读938
问个问题
注册太麻烦？点这里查看免费答疑吧！
博币不足
加"GMAT小百科"小智微信
直接送200
