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| (15) | withdrawn from federal public lands—i.e., withdrawn |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| order has ever designated or withdrawn the pueblos | |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 author cites the fact that the Rio Grande pueblos were never formally withdrawn from public lands primarily in order to do which of the following?
选项:
A、Suggest why it might have been argued that the Winters doctrine ought not to apply to pueblo lands
B、Imply that the United States never really acquired sovereignty over pueblo lands
C、Argue that the pueblo lands ought still to be considered part of federal public lands
D、Support the argument that the water rights of citizens other than American Indians are limited by the Winters doctrine
E、Suggest that federal courts cannot claim jurisdiction over cases disputing the traditional diversion and use of water by Pueblo Indians
答案:
A
提问：
怎么找逻辑关系 定位在哪 不是很明白
解答：
点赞0
阅读3489
提问：
怎么找逻辑关系 定位在哪 不是很明白
解答：
点赞0
阅读3490
提问：
请老师讲解定位思路,并分析A/D的区别: 都谈到W,因此从是否涉及W入手无法排除D选项阿...
解答：
点赞0
阅读3485
提问：
我定位到了withdraw后面那句 但还是没选出答案
解答：
点赞0
阅读3487
提问：
问的是引用例子为了说明什么，例子本身没用，我定位到了第二段第一句，就是例子的前面一句，正确答案应该是定位到例子的后面一句。请老师指教我定位上的错误。
解答：
点赞-1
阅读3478
提问：
通过withdrawn定位，找到对应的原文。看到有withdrawn的这句话前面有个in any event，觉得这句话是举具体事实支持分号前面的内容，则将前一句读了。withdrawn这句话的后一句有一个转折，觉得不是withdrawn的目的，则没有读。请问老师，这样的定位方法是否错了？
解答：
点赞0
阅读3481
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
