【OG24-504题】The “pragmatic approach” mentioned in the highlighted text of the passage is best defined as one that_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if (1)the land in question lies within an enclave under exclusive federal jurisdiction; (2) the land has been formally withdrawn from federal public lands— i.e., withdrawn from the stock of federal lands available for private use under federal land use laws-and set aside or reserved; and (3) the circumstances reveal the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constituted a part of federal public lands; in any event, no treaty, statute, or executive order has ever designated or withdrawn the pueblos from public lands as American Indian reservations.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.

The “pragmatic approach” mentioned in the highlighted text of the passage is best defined as one that

grants recognition to reservations that were never formally established but that have traditionally been treated as such determines the water rights of all citizens in a particular region by examining the actual history of water usage in that region gives federal courts the right to reserve water along with land even when it is clear that the government originally intended to reserve only the land bases the decision to recognize the legal rights of a group on the practical effect such a recognition is likely to have on other citizens dictates that courts ignore precedents set by such cases as Winters v. United States in deciding what water rights belong to reserved land

正确答案： A

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。随后说明后续判决以Winters案为依据，明确了法院认定联邦保留特定用途水权的条件。还提到一些美国印第安部落基于传统分流和用水方式也确立了水权，以Rio Grande pueblo为例，虽该地从未正式构成联邦公有土地一部分，但不影响Winters原则的应用，其采用了务实做法，这种做法在Arizona v. California (1963)案中也得到支持。 文章类型及逻辑简图
文章类型为总分结构。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 Some Indian tribes: water rights based on traditional use (e.g., Rio Grande pueblo) Pragmatic approach: buttressed by Arizona v. California (1963) 做题方法及问题类型
这是一道细节定义题，通过定位文中对“pragmatic approach”的相关描述来解题，定位提示句子为“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...” 。 选项分析
A选项：“grants recognition to reservations that were never formally established but that have traditionally been treated as such”，与文中对Rio Grande pueblo虽未正式构成联邦公有土地一部分，但一直被当作保留地，这种务实做法相符，所以该选项正确。 B选项：文中未提及通过检查特定区域用水实际历史来确定所有公民水权，属于无中生有，错误。 C选项：文中未表明即使政府原意图只保留土地时，联邦法院也有权保留水和土地，错误。 D选项：文中没有依据对其他公民的实际影响来决定承认某群体合法权利的相关内容，错误。 E选项：文中说后续判决以Winters案为依据，并非忽略Winters案先例，错误。

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：