11月1号机经

luckykatherine

二战考砸了，冷静了几天，先回馈CD吧最变态的阅读：
讲美国的什么winter 法案对美国人的water right 有一项规定，由于规定本身写得模棱两可的，带来很多不同的解释
然后后面一大段全部都是这样的形式：如果按照A解释，那会给美国人带来什么后果；如果按照B解释，那会给非美国人带来什么困扰；如果C解释，又会怎样怎样
所以考细节题时要耐心地找·····
其他的都不记得了···
擦干眼泪，三战吧
命苦啊···

SEAS

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(1) the land in question lies within an enclave under exclusive federal jurisdiction, (2) the land has been formally withdrawn from federal public lands — i.e., withdrawn from the stock of federal lands available for private use under federal land use laws — and set aside or reserved, and (3) the circumstances reveal the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a part of federal public lands; in any event, no treaty, statute, or executive order has ever designated or withdrawn the pueblos from public lands as American Indian reservations.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


想问一下楼主，是这篇么？

dovyzhu

是这篇么？求确认！！

ftdonnaf

这片是og上的啊啊啊？？？

cba1234

亲, 祝福下次人品爆发750+, 请再回忆点语法吧. 感谢.

luckykatherine

这篇看看算背景知识吧机经是又长又臭的一篇，全部都是问号，答案，问号，答案，这样的形式···