【OG24-506题】The author cites the fact that the Rio Grande pueblos were never formally withdrawn from public lands primarily in order to do which of the following?_mofa留学圈mofaGRE在线题库系统_GRE在线搜题_GRE题库解析_GRE真题机经_GRE课程_GRE培训机构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if (1)the land in question lies within an enclave under exclusive federal jurisdiction; (2) the land has been formally withdrawn from federal public lands— i.e., withdrawn from the stock of federal lands available for private use under federal land use laws-and set aside or reserved; and (3) the circumstances reveal the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constituted a part of federal public lands; in any event, no treaty, statute, or executive order has ever designated or withdrawn the pueblos from public lands as American Indian reservations.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 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?

Suggest why it might have been argued that the Winters doctrine ought not to apply to pueblo lands Imply that the United States never really acquired sovereignty over pueblo lands Argue that the pueblo lands ought still to be considered part of federal public lands Support the argument that the water rights of citizens other than American Indians are limited by the Winters doctrine Suggest that federal courts cannot claim jurisdiction over cases disputing the traditional diversion and use of water by Pueblo Indians

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Fort Berthold印第安保留地的用水权被条约保留给美国印第安人，即便条约未提及水权，法院认为政府创建保留地时意图保留水权。之后阐述后续判决确立了法院认定联邦保留特定用途水权的条件。接着以Rio Grande pueblos为例，说明其在1848年美国取得主权时已存在，且从未正式从公共土地中撤出，但Winters原则仍适用，因为美国将其视为保留地，这种务实做法在Arizona v. California (1963)案中得到支持。 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 in treaty Later decisions: established conditions for federal water rights reservation Rio Grande pueblos example: existed before U.S. sovereignty, not formally withdrawn from public lands, but Winters doctrine applies Arizona v. California (1963): supported pragmatic approach 做题方法及问题类型
这是一道细节目的题，通过定位关键词“Rio Grande pueblos were never formally withdrawn from public lands”所在句子及上下文来解题。 选项分析
A选项：“Suggest why it might have been argued that the Winters doctrine ought not to apply to pueblo lands”。Rio Grande pueblos从未正式从公共土地中撤出这一事实，能说明为何有人会认为Winters原则不适用于普韦布洛土地，符合文意，当选。 B选项：文章未提及美国从未真正取得普韦布洛土地主权，无中生有，排除。 C选项：文章重点不是争论普韦布洛土地仍是联邦公共土地的一部分，与原文主旨不符，排除。 D选项：文中没有提到Winters原则限制非美国印第安公民水权的相关内容，排除。 E选项：文章未表明联邦法院不能对普韦布洛印第安人传统用水争议案件主张管辖权，排除。

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：