【OG24-505题】It can be inferred from the passage that the Winters doctrine has been used to establish which of the following?_mofa留学圈mofaGRE在线题库系统_GRE在线搜题_GRE题库解析_GRE真题机经_GRE课程_GRE培训机构

最新题目

题目内容

纠错

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 the reservation, intended to deal fairly with American Indians by reserving 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if (1)the land in question lies within an enclave under exclusive federal jurisdiction; (2) the land has been formally withdrawn from federal public lands— i.e., withdrawn from the stock of federal lands available for private use under federal land use laws-and set aside or reserved; and (3) the circumstances reveal the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constituted a part of federal public lands; in any event, no treaty, statute, or executive order has ever designated or withdrawn the pueblos from public lands as American Indian reservations.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.

It can be inferred from the passage that the Winters doctrine has been used to establish which of the following?

A rule that the government may reserve water only by explicit treaty or agreement A legal distinction between federal lands reserved for American Indians and federal lands reserved for other purposes Criteria governing when the federal government may set land aside for a particular purpose The special status of American Indian tribes' rights to reserved land The federal right to reserve water implicitly as well as explicitly under certain conditions

正确答案： E

参考解析

提交我的解析

文章大意逻辑
文章开篇介绍在Winters v. United States (1908)案中，最高法院判定建立Fort Berthold印第安保留地的条约为美国印第安人保留了使用流经或毗邻该保留地水域的权利。虽条约未提及水权，但法院认为政府创建保留地时意图公平对待印第安人。后续判决援引Winters案，确立了联邦为特定目的保留水权的条件。接着以Rio Grande pueblos为例，说明即使其土地未正式成为联邦公共土地或印第安保留地，Winters原则依然适用，因为判定印第安保留地更多是基于实践而非法律定义，且这种务实做法得到了Arizona v. California (1963)案的支持。 文章类型及逻辑简图
文章类型为观点阐述型。逻辑简图： Winters v. United States (1908): Supreme Court held water rights reservation for Fort Berthold Indian Reservation Later decisions: Criteria for federal water rights reservation Land in enclave under federal jurisdiction Formally withdrawn from federal public lands Circumstances show government intention Example of Rio Grande pueblos Not formally part of federal public lands or reservations Winters doctrine still applies Arizona v. California (1963) supports pragmatic approach 做题方法及问题类型
这是一道推断题，做题方法是通过定位文章中关于Winters原则应用及相关条件的描述进行推断。 选项分析
A选项：文章未提及政府只能通过明确的条约或协议保留水权，属于无中生有，排除。 B选项：文章重点不是联邦为印第安人保留的土地和为其他目的保留的土地之间的法律区别，排除。 C选项：文章主要说的是联邦保留水权的条件，而非设定土地用途的标准，排除。 D选项：文章并非围绕印第安部落保留土地权利的特殊地位展开，排除。 E选项：从文章中Winters案及后续判决可知，联邦在某些情况下隐含和明确地拥有保留水权的权利，该项可以从文中推断得出，当选。

题目讨论 (如果对题目有任何的疑惑，欢迎在这里提出来，大家会帮你解答的哦~)

还没有人评论,赶快抢个沙发~

做题笔记

参考解析

题目讨论 (如果对题目有任何的疑惑，欢迎在这里提出来，大家会帮你解答的哦~)

请选择错误类型：

请描述一下这个错误：