Reading Comprehension

试题详情

文章:

    In Winters v. United States (1908), the Supreme Court held that the right to use waters flowing through or adjacent to the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation was reserved to American Indians by the treaty establishing the reservation. Although this treaty did not mention water rights, the Court ruled that the federal government, when it created thereservation, intended to deal fairly with American Indians by preserving for them the waters without which their 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if (1) the land in question lies within an enclave under exclusive federal jurisdiction, (2) the land has been formally withdrawn from federal public lands — i.e., withdrawn from the stock of federal lands available for private use under federal land use laws — and set aside or reserved, and (3) the circumstances reveal the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 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 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constituted a part of federal public lands; in any event, no treaty, statute, or executive order has ever designated or withdrawn the pueblos from public lands as American Indian reservations.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 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 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 considered to have become reservations.

题目:

The primary purpose of the passage is to

选项:

A、trace the development of laws establishing American Indian reservations
B、explain the legal bases for the water rights of American Indian tribes
C、question the legal criteria often used to determine the water rights of American Indian tribes
D、discuss evidence establishing the earliest date at which the federal government recognized the water rights of American Indians
E、point out a legal distinction between different types of American Indian reservations

答案:

B

提问:

我是张慧雯老师,本解析专为参与《GMAT阅读能力提升营》的同学录制,点击即可听详细解析喽~
评分: 1
浏览: 179

提问:

A和B选项之间徘徊,最终选择A,认为读了文章脉络后认为是在讲水权该归谁的发展,B选项是说解释印第安人水权的法律基础,从哪里能看出这篇文章是在解释什么基础呢?而不是A所说的追溯其发展?
评分: 0
浏览: 117

提问:

我在DE中徘徊。主旨有时候容易不够客观,请老师帮我解析一下关键点对应的逻辑连关系怎么看出不是DE而是B。谢谢
评分: 0
浏览: 103

提问:

我现在做题只开始了逻辑和改错,正确率一般60%左右真的不理想,我8.5号就要考试了,我想问下,我现在还是主要逻辑和语法,想把正确率稳定在70%在攻克阅读您觉得这样合适么? 数学和其他的我准备最后两周的时候开始,也就是7.20号以后。老师您觉得我这样合适么?还有什么好方法能够提高逻辑和语法的正确绿呢?我现在主要的问题就是逻辑读不懂题或者要读很久 谢谢
评分: 0
浏览: 96

提问:

这篇文章就讲了水的使用权和保留权吧 第一段说了几个适用于判断的法规 第二段说了不适用于法规的现象。而且这道题的其中一个问题的答案也说了 There would be no legal basis for the water rights of the Rio Grande pueblos.【如下】那为什么这篇文章的primary purpose还是explain the legal bases for the water rights of American Indian tribes 这不是自相矛盾吗 The passage suggests that, if the criteria discussed in the highlighted text were the only criteria for establishing a reservation's water rights, which of the following would be true? The water rights of the inhabitants of the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation would not take precedence over those of other citizens. Reservations established before 1848 would be judged to have no water rights. There would be no legal basis for the water rights of the Rio Grande pueblos. Reservations other than American Indian reservations could not be created with reserved water rights. Treaties establishing reservations would have to mention water rights explicitly in order to reserve water for a particular purpose.
评分: 0
浏览: 91

提问:

请问老师,我看到文章第一段围绕水权讲,第二段讲美国印第安人的水权,我就理解成这是在区分不同的水权类型就选了e,想不明白为什么会选b,选b的依据是什么
评分: 0
浏览: 89

提问:

我是张慧雯老师,本解析专为参与《GMAT阅读能力提升营》的同学录制,点击即可听详细解析喽~
评分: 1
浏览: 179

提问:

A和B选项之间徘徊,最终选择A,认为读了文章脉络后认为是在讲水权该归谁的发展,B选项是说解释印第安人水权的法律基础,从哪里能看出这篇文章是在解释什么基础呢?而不是A所说的追溯其发展?
评分: 0
浏览: 117

提问:

我在DE中徘徊。主旨有时候容易不够客观,请老师帮我解析一下关键点对应的逻辑连关系怎么看出不是DE而是B。谢谢
评分: 0
浏览: 103

提问:

我现在做题只开始了逻辑和改错,正确率一般60%左右真的不理想,我8.5号就要考试了,我想问下,我现在还是主要逻辑和语法,想把正确率稳定在70%在攻克阅读您觉得这样合适么? 数学和其他的我准备最后两周的时候开始,也就是7.20号以后。老师您觉得我这样合适么?还有什么好方法能够提高逻辑和语法的正确绿呢?我现在主要的问题就是逻辑读不懂题或者要读很久 谢谢
评分: 0
浏览: 96

提问:

这篇文章就讲了水的使用权和保留权吧 第一段说了几个适用于判断的法规 第二段说了不适用于法规的现象。而且这道题的其中一个问题的答案也说了 There would be no legal basis for the water rights of the Rio Grande pueblos.【如下】那为什么这篇文章的primary purpose还是explain the legal bases for the water rights of American Indian tribes 这不是自相矛盾吗 The passage suggests that, if the criteria discussed in the highlighted text were the only criteria for establishing a reservation's water rights, which of the following would be true? The water rights of the inhabitants of the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation would not take precedence over those of other citizens. Reservations established before 1848 would be judged to have no water rights. There would be no legal basis for the water rights of the Rio Grande pueblos. Reservations other than American Indian reservations could not be created with reserved water rights. Treaties establishing reservations would have to mention water rights explicitly in order to reserve water for a particular purpose.
评分: 0
浏览: 91

提问:

请问老师,我看到文章第一段围绕水权讲,第二段讲美国印第安人的水权,我就理解成这是在区分不同的水权类型就选了e,想不明白为什么会选b,选b的依据是什么
评分: 0
浏览: 89
点我领取
免费专项课程
在线咨询