2. 职称英语
  3. The Supreme Court is no longer able to keep pace with the tremendous number of c

The Supreme Court is no longer able to keep pace with the tremendous number of c

游客2025-02-26  11
问题 The Supreme Court is no longer able to keep pace with the tremendous number of cases it agrees to decide. The Court schedules and hears 160 hours of oral argument each year, and 108 hours of next year’s term will be taken up by cases left over from this year. Certainly the Court cannot be asked to increase its already burdensome hours. The most reasonable long-range solution to this problem is to allow the Court to decide many cases without hearing oral argument; in this way the Court might eventually increase dramatically the number of cases it decides each year. Which of the following, if true, could best be used to argue against the feasibility of the solution suggested above?
选项 A、The time the Court spends hearing oral argument is only a small part of the total time it spends deciding a case.
B、The Court cannot legitimately avoid hearing oral argument in any case left over from last year.
C、Most authorities agree that 160 hours of oral argument is the maximum number that the Court can handle per year.
D、Even now the Court decides a small number of cases without hearing oral argument.
E、In many cases, the delay of a hearing for a full year can be extremely expensive to the parties involved.
答案 A
解析 本题问题目的清晰，让我们反对上述推理中的the feasibility of the solution，因此读题重点应放在段落最后一个句子上，且最后一个句子明显是提出一个方法“to allow the court to decide many caseswithout hearing oral argument”，而达到目的(in this way为引导目的的关键词)“法院能eventually increasedramatically．．．”(请注意dramatically)，反对重点反对the solution即方法。若法院用于听取口头辩论的时间仅仅占裁决一个案件所花费时间的很少一部分，如(A)所说，那么即使裁决案例时不听取口头辩论，也不可能“dramatically”增加每年裁决的案件数目。所以(A)选项通过对段落推理所提出的方法A的质疑，而起到了反对作用。因此(A)正确。(D)易误选，但若在听取口头辩论时每年裁决10个案例，而不听取口头辩论每年裁决30个案件(尽管也很少)，但是有了一个“dramatically”的增加，所以(D)不可能起到反对作用。(B)中的“last year”与本题推理无关；(E)中的“expensive”与推理的“increase dramatical—ly”也无关。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3973536.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)