
1. 推断题
A. 原文提到这一点是为了转折, This fact, however, has not….
B. 不符,原文提到although they at that time…
C. 原文说he pueblo lands never formally constituted a part of federal public lands,并且这一点并不妨碍它获得水权,因为究竟是不是federal public land并不重要,重要的是practice,即事实如何。
D. 不是陈述“RG从来没有正式从公共土地里收回”的目的。
E. 没提
题目讨论 (3条评论)

-
TQ
回文定位"Rio Grande pueblos"到第二段第二句(第二行). 开头是for example, 也就是说整个Rio Grande pueblos就是为了解释第一句的"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." Rio Grande pueblos不符合第一段criteria里面的第二条" formally withdrawn from public lands as reservations",所以理论上应该不符合W doctrine. 但是特例是W doctrine有broader application (based on practice, but a legal defination). 所以选A, 即, 即使不满足W的三个条件, 也可以被reserve water rights, 即此处W不apply B: 全文讨论water right, 与sovereignty无太多关联, 所以, 对于功能题目"cite... in order to...."一般都是与主旨(water right)相关的,B错 D: 并没有提到citizen water rights E: 只有第一段提到了jurisdiction, Rio Grande pueblos在第二段, 无关选项 C: 全文是讨论water right, 与land归属权没有太多关系
1
0 回复 2020-12-27 05:26:25
-
506230whpp
A “>说明为什么温特斯学说不适用于普韦布洛土地 B “>暗示美国从未真正获得普韦布洛土地的主权 C “>主张普韦布洛土地仍应被视为联邦公共土地的一部分 D “>支持美国印第安人以外的公民的水权受温特斯主义限制的论点 E 建议联邦法院不能对普韦布洛印第安人传统的引水和用水争议案件提出管辖权
0
0 回复 2020-09-06 16:40:13
-
Zehnstein
in any event, no treaty, statute, or executive order has ever designated or withdrawn the pueblos from public lands as American Indian reservations.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.
0
0 回复 2020-02-24 22:37:46