精读4


题 目 排 序: 题目类型  |  题目热度  |  题目难度

答 题 方 式: 单题练习(每做一题核对一题答案)   |    模拟考试(做完所有题一次性核对答案)

【1】 单选

   A divided Supreme Court ruled Monday that police may take DNA samples when booking those ar- rested for serious crimes, narrowly upholding a Maryland law and opening the door to more widespread collection of DNA by law enforcement.
   The court ruled 5 to 4 that government has a legitimate interest in collecting DNA from arrestees, just as it takes photographs and collects fingerprints. Rejecting the view that the practice constitutes an unlawful search, the majority said it was justified to establish the identity of the person in custody. "DNA identification represents an important advance in the techniques used by law enforcement to serve legitimate police concerns for as long as there have been arrests," Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote for the majority.
   The dissenters were three of the court's liberals plus conservative Justice Antonin Scalia, who ampli- fied his displeasure by reading a summary of his dissent. ‘‘The court has cast aside a bedrock rule of our Fourth Amendment law: that the government may not search its citizens for evidence of crime unless there is a reasonable cause to believe that such evidence will be found," In his dissent, Scalia wrote that the majority's attempts to justify the use of DNA as an identification tool "taxes the naivety of the na- ive. " He added, "Make no mistake about it: As an entirely predictable consequence of today's decision, your DNA can be taken and entered into a national DNA database if you are ever arrested, rightly or wrongly, and for whatever reason ."
   Kennedy said Maryland's law is more limited than that. He noted that DNA can be taken only from t ose suspected of "serious" crime,that the sample is destroyed if the arrestee is not convicted,and that the DNA tests did not violate the privacy of the person by revealing genetic traits or medical information Besides that, Kennedy said, DNA identification contains critical clues about whether an arrestee should be eligible for being released on bail or whether he would be likely to flee because he had committed a crime more serious than the one for which he was arrested.
   But Scalia said, "Solving unsolved crimes is a noble objective, but it occupies a lower place in the A- 1 merican noble objectives than the protection of our people from suspicionless law-enforcement searches," He concluded with a nod to the Framers of the Constitution: "I doubt that the proud men who wrote the charter of our liberties would have been so eager to open their mouths for royal inspection. "
   The decision was evidence of how the court's ideological differences blur on Fourth Amendment ca- ses. Earlier this term, Scalia joined Ginsburg, Sotomayor and Kagan to rule that bringing a police dog to a suspected drug dealer's door without a warrant amounted to an unlawful search. And Scalia joined Sotomayor's broad ruling in another cas'e that held police officers generally must try to get a warrant be- fore forcing uncooperative drunken-driving suspects to submit to a blood test.

16. The majority of Supreme Court Justices hold that the collection of DNA samples from arrestees _____.
[A] overestimates the implications of techniques
[B] provides an effective identification tool
[C] serves the interest of the government
[D] constitutes an illegal police search
  • A.
  • B.
  • C.
  • D.
登录后可以做题并查看详细解题过程; 分值【10.0
【2】 单选

17. According to Paragraph 3, Justice Antonin Scalia's dissent is largely out of _____.
[A] his strict adherence to the Fourth Amendment law
[B] his concern over misjudgment and wrong arrests
[C] his defense of a citizen's privacy in law enforcement
[D] his doubt about the reliability of DNA identification
  • A.
  • B.
  • C.
  • D.
登录后可以做题并查看详细解题过程; 分值【10.0
【3】 单选

18. On which of the following would Kennedy agree,according to Paragraph 4?
[A] Maryland's law about DNA collection has obvious limitations and needs to be improved.
[B] DNA samples should be taken from for both serious crimes and minor offences.
[C] DNA samples collected from arrestees should be entered into a national DNA database
[D] DNA identification provides critical information about the potential danger posed by an arrestee
  • A.
  • B.
  • C.
  • D.
登录后可以做题并查看详细解题过程; 分值【0.0
【4】 单选

19. By mentioning the Framers of the Constitution, Scalia intended to _____.
[A] question the nobility of the judicial process of Maryland case
[B] demonstrate the historic significance of Maryland case
[C] denounce the court's decision as against the protection of personal rights
[D] illustrate the embarrassing DNA sample collection procedure
  • A.
  • B.
  • C.
  • D.
登录后可以做题并查看详细解题过程; 分值【0.0
【5】 单选

20. Which of the fc)llowing is suggested in the last paragraph?
[A] The court's attitude on Fourth Amendment cases is increasingly apparent.
[B] The justices usually split on decisions about the Fourth Amendment cases.
[C] Scalia has an inconsistent attitude on the issue of law-enforcement searches.
[D] The court sometimes goes against the Fourth Amendment deliberately.
  • A.
  • B.
  • C.
  • D.
登录后可以做题并查看详细解题过程; 分值【0.0
【6】 单选

[A] 全文掌握

[B] 粗心

[C] 理解不够


【全文精解】

  本文话题涉及“执法过程中对公民权利的保护”,节选自Washington Post《华盛顿邮报》2013. 06.03一篇题为Supreme Court upholds Maryland law,says police may take DNA samples from arrestees(最高法院认定警方可以从被捕人身上提取DNA样本)的文章。本文主要亮点有:争议案件十热议话题,语言凝练,结构清晰,按照“介绍争议性案件及其影响(第一段)——介绍双方法官第一轮的辩论(第二、三段)——介绍双方第二轮辩论(第四、五段)——总结案件意义(第六段)"的脉络展开论述。

  Ⅰ第一段简述事件:最高法院支持马里兰州法律,裁定警方可以采集严重罪行被捕人的DNA。首先介绍最高法院裁定结果,随后指出其影响:维持了马里兰州的一项法律、打开了执法部门广泛收集DNA的大门。主要逻辑衔接是:本段为独句段,开门见山交代事件。其中ruled that引出裁定内容,di-vided强调当时情形“法官分为两方、争论激烈”,upholding...和opening the door to...作结果状语,表明这一裁定所产生的影响。核心关键词为:police may take DNA samples(警方可以提取DNA样本)。
  Ⅱ第二、三段介绍双方的第一轮辩论。第二段介绍多数派的基本立场及理由(即本案判决结果)。首先指出法庭以5:4的票数裁定政府具有采集被捕者DNA的权力;然后具体陈述理由“多数派法官驳斥了该做法构成非法搜查的观点,认为确认在押犯人的身份正当合理”;随后援引多数派法官代表肯尼迪观点进一步说明理由:DNA鉴定代表了执法部门为服务警方合法需求所采用的一项重要的技术进步。主要逻辑衔接是:①首句The court ruled回应首段Supreme Court ruled,实现段间衔接;5:4回应上段divided,凸显判决中的“热烈争议”局面。②第二句the majority呼应上句the court,引出法庭作出如此判决的原因(多数法官的观点);rejecting the view...the majority said...正反说明多数法官观点;句中the practice指代collecting DNA from arrestees;it was justified表明多数法官对DNA验证的支持态度。③第三句援引肯尼迪的观点进一步说明法庭判决的理由,for the majority体现其站位;importantadvance in the techniques、legitimate police concerns均体现肯尼迪对DNA鉴定的支持态度。核心关键词为:it was justified(正当合理的)。
  Ⅲ第三段介绍少数派法官的不同立场及其理由。首先介绍反对派法官并选出其中代表——安东宁•斯卡利亚;然后引用斯卡利亚在法庭上的异议陈述,提出DNA鉴定有违第四修正案的基本规则;最后凸显斯卡利亚对“支持DNA鉴定’’的强烈不满和警告:这是在利用人们的天真无知,实际上会造成人们的隐私被侵犯。主要逻辑衔接是:①首句dissenters(持异议者)与the majority相对,实现段间衔接并表明开始介绍反对方观点。②第二句直接引用Antonin Scalia法庭上异议陈述原话,说明反方观点,cast aside a bedrock rule of our Fourth Amendment law(摒弃了第四修正案的基本原则)体现了斯卡利亚对多数意见的强烈不满。③第三、四句Antonin Scalia直接对多数派的支持理由予以批驳;“引号+He added+引号”将两句紧密衔接。句中以tax the nalvety of the nalve(利用轻信者的天真)和make nomistake about it(不要搞错这一点)凸显作者强烈的反对和警告。核心关键词为:①has cast aside a bed-rock rule of our Fourth Amendment law(法院摒弃了第四修正案一条基本规则);②consequence oftoday's decision(今天所做决定的后果)。
  Ⅳ第四、五段介绍双方的第二轮辩论。第四段介绍肯尼迪对DNA鉴定进行的辩护。肯尼迪首先针对反对方批驳进行辩护“马里兰州并非对DNA提取不加限制,而是只允许从涉嫌犯下严重罪行的被捕者身上提取DNA样本;且如被捕人未被定罪、则毁掉样本;而且DNA测试并未以‘泄露基因特征或医疗信息’的方式侵犯被捕人隐私”;随后肯尼迪进一步指出DNA鉴定的意义“DNA鉴定包含了有关被捕者潜在威胁的重要信息”。主要逻辑衔接是:①段首词Kennedy表明文章论述角度已经由“代表少数派的Scalia观点’’转至“代表多数派的Kennedy观点”;that指代第三段末斯卡利亚所描绘的令人担忧的情形,实现段间衔接。②第二句具体说明首句,并列宾语从句He noted that...that...that.说明马里兰州的法律并非对DNA提取不加限制,反对Scalia的观点。③第三句以Besides引出对Kenndy观点的进一步阐述,点明DNA鉴定包含了关于嫌犯重要线索的正面作用。核心关键词为:more  limitedthan that(比上述情形多出了某些限制)。
  V第五段介绍斯卡利亚第二轮的反对意见。首先斯卡利亚表明,破解案件诚然是一个高尚目标,但它所占位置低于保护我们的人民免受毫无怀疑根据的执法搜查;随后他进一步指出,骄傲的宪法的缔造者不会热切地张开嘴接受检测(即:DNA检测违背了宪法缔造者的初衷)。主要逻辑衔接是:①段首词But反转上文,引出Scalia新一轮的反对。句中以but形成句内转折、将Scalia的语义重点拉至后半句:保护人们不受执法过程中无根据的搜查才是更为高贵的行为(即:提取被捕者DNA的行为不当)。②第二句Scalia进一步指出提取DNA的做法有悖宪法制定者对人们的隐私和骄傲的维护。句中the men who wrote the charter of our liberties同义复现the Framers of the Constitution,指宪法缔造者;would have been以虚拟语气推测“宪法缔造者会对今日案件作出何种判决”。核心关键词为:protectionof people from suspicionless law-enforcement searches(保护人民免受毫无怀疑根据的执法搜查)。
  Ⅵ第六段收束全文,指出第四修正案相关案件历来是争议案件、案件尤其难断。首先指出,该项裁决证明了在和第四修正案相关的案件上,最高法院法官们的思想观念差异非常模糊(即:法官们对此类案件往往会形成力量相当的两方,而很难以明确的投票差异作出判决)。随后列举其他两起与本次相迥异的审判结果,体现就该类案件的对立胶着情形。主要逻辑衔接是:①首句以The decision was ev-idence of收束上文所述争议情形,对法庭判决做出概括性评判。②第二、三句以And实现并列衔接,介绍另外两起斯卡利亚参与裁定的第四修正案相关案件,amounted to an unlawful search、must try to geta warrant表明两案判决结果和本案结果迥异,进一步说明了首句观点。核心关键词为:the court's ide-ological differences blur on Fourth Amendment cases(在和第四修正案相关的案件上,最高法院思想观念的差异模糊)。


【全文翻译】

  最高法院于周一以法官的分歧性意见裁定,将以严重罪行被捕的犯人记录在案时,警方可以对其提取DNA样本。这一裁定勉强维持了马里兰州的一项法律,打开了执法部门广泛收集DNA的大门。

  最高法院以5:4的票数裁定,政府具有采集被捕者DNA的合法权益,正如它可以拍摄照片、采集指纹。大多数法官驳斥了“该做法构成非法搜查’’的观点,认为确认在押犯人的身份是正当合理的。“DNA鉴定代表了执法部门为服务警方合法需求所采用的一项重要的技术进步”,法官安东尼·肯尼迪代表多数派写道。

  反对者为最高法院的三位自由派法官,加上保守派法官安东宁·斯卡利亚,后者通过朗读其异议陈述表达了自己强烈的不满。‘‘法院摒弃了我们第四修正案的一条基本规则:除非有合理的原因认定需要找到该证据,否则政府不可以对公民进行罪证搜查”。在他的异见书中,斯卡利亚写道,多数派试图以“用做鉴定工具”证明使用DNA的合法性,这是“让幼稚轻信的人为他们的天真上税”。他补充道,“对这一点不要搞错:今天所做决定完全可以预见的后果是,一旦你什么时候被捕,不管是真有罪还是被冤枉,也不管是因何被捕,你的DNA都可以被提取,并纳入国家DNA数据库。"

  肯尼迪说马里兰州的法律比上述情形多出了某些限制。他指出,DNA只能从那些涉嫌犯下“严重”罪行的人身上提取,且如果被捕人未被定罪,则会毁掉样本,而且DNA测试并未以“泄露基因特征或医疗信息’’的方式侵犯被捕人隐私。除此之外,肯尼迪说,DNA鉴定包含了有关“被捕者是否符合保释的条件’’以及“他是否可能会因自己曾经犯下比因之被捕更严重的罪行而逃跑”的关键线索。

  但斯卡利亚说道,“破解未破案件是一个高尚的目标,但在美国人民众多的高尚目标中,它所占位置低于保护我们的人民免受毫无怀疑根据的执法搜查。’’斯卡利亚写道。他以向宪法制定者们致敬的方式结束(其陈述):“我很怀疑书写了我们自由宪章那些骄傲的人会如此热切地张开嘴,等待高贵的检测。’’

  该项裁决证明在和第四修正案相关的案件上,法庭的思想观念差异是如何趋于模糊。这个开庭期早些时候,斯卡利亚与金斯伯格,索托马约尔以及卡根一同裁定,在没有搜查证的情况下把警犬带到疑为毒贩的人家门口相当于非法搜查。而且斯卡利亚与索托马约尔在另一案件中共同作出宽泛裁定,认定通常情况下警官强迫不合作的酒驾嫌疑人验血之前必须取得搜查令。

  • A.
  • B.
  • C.
登录后可以做题并查看详细解题过程; 分值【10.0





0.2536s