_____ the ruling came from the Supreme Court, a coalition of public sector unions in California was ready with a response.A、IfB、OnceC、SinceD、Unless
_____ the ruling came from the Supreme Court, a coalition of public sector unions in California was ready with a response.
A、If
B、Once
C、Since
D、Unless
B、Once
C、Since
D、Unless
参考解析
解析：本题考查语义逻辑。一旦最高法院做出裁决，加州的公共部门工会联盟已经准备好做出回应。故本题选B.
相关考题：
It was in 1954 that the Supreme Court ruled that the practice of segregating blacks into separate schools was unconstitional.() 此题为判断题(对，错)。
Generally speaking, the U.S. economy consists of three sectors: the market sector, the corporate sector and the public sector.()
根据下列材料，请回答 36～40 题：If the trade unionist Jimmy Hoffa were alive today, he would probably represent civil servant. When Hoffa’s Teamsters were in their prime in 1960, only one in ten American government workers belonged to a union; now 36% do. In 2009 the number of unionists in America’s public sector passed that of their fellow members in the private sector. In Britain, more than half of public-sector workers but only about 15% of private-sector ones are unionized.There are three reasons for the public-sector unions’ thriving. First, they can shut things down without suffering much in the way of consequences. Second, they are mostly bright and well-educated. A quarter of America’s public-sector workers have a university degree. Third, they now dominate left-of-centre politics. Some of their ties go back a long way. Britain’s Labor Party, as its name implies, has long been associated with trade unionism. Its current leader, Ed Miliband, owes his position to votes from public-sector unions.At the state level their influence can be even more fearsome. Mark Baldassare of the Public Policy Institute of California points out that much of the state’s budget is patrolled by unions. The teachers’ unions keep an eye on schools, the CCPOA on prisons and a variety of labor groups on health care.In many rich countries average wages in the state sector are higher than in the private one. But the real gains come in benefits and work practices. Politicians have repeatedly “backloaded” public-sector pay deals, keeping the pay increases modest but adding to holidays and especially pensions that are already generous.Reform. has been vigorously opposed, perhaps most egregiously in education, where charter schools, academies and merit pay all faced drawn-out battles. Even though there is plenty of evidence that the quality of the teachers is the most important variable, teachers’ unions have fought against getting rid of bad ones and promoting good ones.As the cost to everyone else has become clearer, politicians have begun to clamp down. In Wisconsin the unions have rallied thousands of supporters against Scott Walker, the hardline Republican governor. But many within the public sector suffer under the current system, too.John Donahue at Harvard’s Kennedy School points out that the norms of culture in Western civil services suit those who want to stay put but is bad for high achievers. The only American public-sector workers who earn well above $250,000 a year are university sports coaches and the president of the United States. Bankers’ fat pay packets have attracted much criticism, but a public-sector system that does not reward high achievers may be a much bigger problem for America.第 36 题 It can be learned from the first paragraph that[A] Teamsters still have a large body of members.[B] Jimmy Hoffa used to work as a civil servant.[C] unions have enlarged their public-sector membership.[D]the government has improved its relationship with unionists.
Which of the following is true of Paragraph 2?[A] Public-sector unions are prudent in taking actions.[B] Education is required for public-sector union membership.[C] Labor Party has long been fighting against public-sector unions.[D]Public-sector unions seldom get in trouble for their actions.
The example of the unions in Wisconsin shows that unions[A]often run against the current political system.[B]can change people’s political attitudes.[C]may be a barrier to public-sector reforms.[D]are dominant in the government.
In a rare unanimous ruling,the US Supreme Court has overturned the corruption conviction of a former Virginia governor,Robert McDonnell.But it did so while holding its nose at the ethics of his conduct,which included accepting gifts such as a Rolex watch and a Ferrari Automobile from a company seeking access to government.The high court’s decision said the judge in Mr.McDonnell’s trail failed to tell a jury that it must look only at his“official acts,”or the former governor’s decisions on“specific”and“unsettled”issues related to his duties.Merely helping a gift-giver gain access to other officials,unless done with clear intent to pressure those officials,is not corruption,the justices found.The court did suggest that accepting favors in return for opening doors is“distasteful”and“nasty.”But under anti-bribery laws,proof must be made of concrete benefits,such as approval of a contract or regulation.Simply arranging a meeting,making a phone call,or hosting an event is not an“official act.”The court’s ruling is legally sound in defining a kind of favoritism that is not criminal.Elected leaders must be allowed to help supporters deal with bureaucratic problems without fear of prosecution of bribery.“The basic compact underlying representative government,”wrote Chief Justice John Roberts for the court,“assumes that public officials will hear from their constituents and act on their concerns.”But the ruling reinforces the need for citizens and their elected representatives,not the courts,to ensure equality of access to government.Officials must not be allowed to play favorites in providing information or in arranging meetings simply because an individual or group provides a campaign donation or a personal gift.This type of integrity requires will-enforced laws in government transparency,such as records of official meetings,rules on lobbying,and information about each elected leader’s source of wealth.Favoritism in official access can fan public perceptions of corruption.But it is not always corruption.Rather officials must avoid double standards,or different types of access for average people and the wealthy.If connections can be bought,a basic premise of democratic society–that all are equal in treatment by government-is undermined.Good government rests on an understanding of the inherent worth of each individual.The court’s ruling is a step forward in the struggle against both corruption and official favoritism.According to Paragraph 4,an official act is deemed corruptive only if it involves____A.concrete returns for gift-givers.B.sizable gains in the form of gifts.C.leaking secrets intentionally.D.breaking contracts officially.
In a rare unanimous ruling,the US Supreme Court has overturned the corruption conviction of a former Virginia governor,Robert McDonnell.But it did so while holding its nose at the ethics of his conduct,which included accepting gifts such as a Rolex watch and a Ferrari Automobile from a company seeking access to government.The high court’s decision said the judge in Mr.McDonnell’s trail failed to tell a jury that it must look only at his“official acts,”or the former governor’s decisions on“specific”and“unsettled”issues related to his duties.Merely helping a gift-giver gain access to other officials,unless done with clear intent to pressure those officials,is not corruption,the justices found.The court did suggest that accepting favors in return for opening doors is“distasteful”and“nasty.”But under anti-bribery laws,proof must be made of concrete benefits,such as approval of a contract or regulation.Simply arranging a meeting,making a phone call,or hosting an event is not an“official act.”The court’s ruling is legally sound in defining a kind of favoritism that is not criminal.Elected leaders must be allowed to help supporters deal with bureaucratic problems without fear of prosecution of bribery.“The basic compact underlying representative government,”wrote Chief Justice John Roberts for the court,“assumes that public officials will hear from their constituents and act on their concerns.”But the ruling reinforces the need for citizens and their elected representatives,not the courts,to ensure equality of access to government.Officials must not be allowed to play favorites in providing information or in arranging meetings simply because an individual or group provides a campaign donation or a personal gift.This type of integrity requires will-enforced laws in government transparency,such as records of official meetings,rules on lobbying,and information about each elected leader’s source of wealth.Favoritism in official access can fan public perceptions of corruption.But it is not always corruption.Rather officials must avoid double standards,or different types of access for average people and the wealthy.If connections can be bought,a basic premise of democratic society–that all are equal in treatment by government-is undermined.Good government rests on an understanding of the inherent worth of each individual.The court’s ruling is a step forward in the struggle against both corruption and official favoritism.The underlined sentence（Para.1）most probably shows that the court____A.avoided defining the extent of McDonnell’s duties.B.made no compromise in convicting McDonnell.C.was contemptuous of McDonnell’s conduct.D.refused to comment on McDonnell’s ethics.
Text 4 If the trade unionist Jimmy Hoffa were alive today,he would probably represent civil servant.When Hoffa’s Teamsters were in their prime in 1960,only one in ten American government workers belonged to a union;now 36%do.In 2009 the number of unionists in America’s public sector passed that of their fellow members in the private sector.In Britain,more than half of public-sector workers but only about 15%of private-sector ones are unionized.There are three reasons for the public-sector unions’thriving.First,they can shut things down without suffering much in the way of consequences.Second,they are mostly bright and well-educated.A quarter of America’s public-sector workers have a university degree.Third,they now dominate left-of-centre politics.Some of their ties go back a long way.Britain’s Labor Party,as its name implies,has long been associated with trade unionism.Its current leader,Ed Miliband,owes his position to votes from public-sector unions.At the state level their influence can be even more fearsome.Mark Baldassare of the Public Policy Institute of California points out that much of the state’s budget is patrolled by unions.The teachers’unions keep an eye on schools,the CCPOA on prisons and a variety of labor groups on health care.In many rich countries average wages in the state sector are higher than in the private one.But the real gains come in benefits and work practices.Politicians have repeatedly“backloaded”public-sector pay deals,keeping the pay increases modest but adding to holidays and especially pensions that are already generous.Reform has been vigorously opposed,perhaps most egregiously in education,where charter schools,academies and merit pay all faced drawn-out battles.Even though there is plenty of evidence that the quality of the teachers is the most important variable,teachers’unions have fought against getting rid of bad ones and promoting good ones.As the cost to everyone else has become clearer,politicians have begun to clamp down.In Wisconsin the unions have rallied thousands of supporters against Scott Walker,the hardline Republican governor.But many within the public sector suffer under the current system,too.John Donahue at Harvard’s Kennedy School points out that the norms of culture in Western civil services suit those who want to stay put but is bad for high achievers.The only American public-sector workers who earn well above$250,000 a year are university sports coaches and the president of the United States.Bankers’fat pay packets have attracted much criticism,but a public-sector system that does not reward high achievers may be a much bigger problem for America.40.John Donahue’s attitude towards the public-sector system is one ofA.disapproval.B.appreciation.C.tolerance.D.indifference.
Text 4 If the trade unionist Jimmy Hoffa were alive today,he would probably represent civil servant.When Hoffa’s Teamsters were in their prime in 1960,only one in ten American government workers belonged to a union;now 36%do.In 2009 the number of unionists in America’s public sector passed that of their fellow members in the private sector.In Britain,more than half of public-sector workers but only about 15%of private-sector ones are unionized.There are three reasons for the public-sector unions’thriving.First,they can shut things down without suffering much in the way of consequences.Second,they are mostly bright and well-educated.A quarter of America’s public-sector workers have a university degree.Third,they now dominate left-of-centre politics.Some of their ties go back a long way.Britain’s Labor Party,as its name implies,has long been associated with trade unionism.Its current leader,Ed Miliband,owes his position to votes from public-sector unions.At the state level their influence can be even more fearsome.Mark Baldassare of the Public Policy Institute of California points out that much of the state’s budget is patrolled by unions.The teachers’unions keep an eye on schools,the CCPOA on prisons and a variety of labor groups on health care.In many rich countries average wages in the state sector are higher than in the private one.But the real gains come in benefits and work practices.Politicians have repeatedly“backloaded”public-sector pay deals,keeping the pay increases modest but adding to holidays and especially pensions that are already generous.Reform has been vigorously opposed,perhaps most egregiously in education,where charter schools,academies and merit pay all faced drawn-out battles.Even though there is plenty of evidence that the quality of the teachers is the most important variable,teachers’unions have fought against getting rid of bad ones and promoting good ones.As the cost to everyone else has become clearer,politicians have begun to clamp down.In Wisconsin the unions have rallied thousands of supporters against Scott Walker,the hardline Republican governor.But many within the public sector suffer under the current system,too.John Donahue at Harvard’s Kennedy School points out that the norms of culture in Western civil services suit those who want to stay put but is bad for high achievers.The only American public-sector workers who earn well above$250,000 a year are university sports coaches and the president of the United States.Bankers’fat pay packets have attracted much criticism,but a public-sector system that does not reward high achievers may be a much bigger problem for America.38.It can be learned from Paragraph 4 that the income in the state sector isA.illegally secured.B.indirectly augmented.C.excessively increased.D.fairly adjusted.
Text 4 If the trade unionist Jimmy Hoffa were alive today,he would probably represent civil servant.When Hoffa’s Teamsters were in their prime in 1960,only one in ten American government workers belonged to a union;now 36%do.In 2009 the number of unionists in America’s public sector passed that of their fellow members in the private sector.In Britain,more than half of public-sector workers but only about 15%of private-sector ones are unionized.There are three reasons for the public-sector unions’thriving.First,they can shut things down without suffering much in the way of consequences.Second,they are mostly bright and well-educated.A quarter of America’s public-sector workers have a university degree.Third,they now dominate left-of-centre politics.Some of their ties go back a long way.Britain’s Labor Party,as its name implies,has long been associated with trade unionism.Its current leader,Ed Miliband,owes his position to votes from public-sector unions.At the state level their influence can be even more fearsome.Mark Baldassare of the Public Policy Institute of California points out that much of the state’s budget is patrolled by unions.The teachers’unions keep an eye on schools,the CCPOA on prisons and a variety of labor groups on health care.In many rich countries average wages in the state sector are higher than in the private one.But the real gains come in benefits and work practices.Politicians have repeatedly“backloaded”public-sector pay deals,keeping the pay increases modest but adding to holidays and especially pensions that are already generous.Reform has been vigorously opposed,perhaps most egregiously in education,where charter schools,academies and merit pay all faced drawn-out battles.Even though there is plenty of evidence that the quality of the teachers is the most important variable,teachers’unions have fought against getting rid of bad ones and promoting good ones.As the cost to everyone else has become clearer,politicians have begun to clamp down.In Wisconsin the unions have rallied thousands of supporters against Scott Walker,the hardline Republican governor.But many within the public sector suffer under the current system,too.John Donahue at Harvard’s Kennedy School points out that the norms of culture in Western civil services suit those who want to stay put but is bad for high achievers.The only American public-sector workers who earn well above$250,000 a year are university sports coaches and the president of the United States.Bankers’fat pay packets have attracted much criticism,but a public-sector system that does not reward high achievers may be a much bigger problem for America.39.The example of the unions in Wisconsin shows that unionsA.often run against the current political system.B.can change people’s political attitudes.C.may be a barrier to public-sector reforms.D.are dominant in the government.
Text 4 If the trade unionist Jimmy Hoffa were alive today,he would probably represent civil servant.When Hoffa’s Teamsters were in their prime in 1960,only one in ten American government workers belonged to a union;now 36%do.In 2009 the number of unionists in America’s public sector passed that of their fellow members in the private sector.In Britain,more than half of public-sector workers but only about 15%of private-sector ones are unionized.There are three reasons for the public-sector unions’thriving.First,they can shut things down without suffering much in the way of consequences.Second,they are mostly bright and well-educated.A quarter of America’s public-sector workers have a university degree.Third,they now dominate left-of-centre politics.Some of their ties go back a long way.Britain’s Labor Party,as its name implies,has long been associated with trade unionism.Its current leader,Ed Miliband,owes his position to votes from public-sector unions.At the state level their influence can be even more fearsome.Mark Baldassare of the Public Policy Institute of California points out that much of the state’s budget is patrolled by unions.The teachers’unions keep an eye on schools,the CCPOA on prisons and a variety of labor groups on health care.In many rich countries average wages in the state sector are higher than in the private one.But the real gains come in benefits and work practices.Politicians have repeatedly“backloaded”public-sector pay deals,keeping the pay increases modest but adding to holidays and especially pensions that are already generous.Reform has been vigorously opposed,perhaps most egregiously in education,where charter schools,academies and merit pay all faced drawn-out battles.Even though there is plenty of evidence that the quality of the teachers is the most important variable,teachers’unions have fought against getting rid of bad ones and promoting good ones.As the cost to everyone else has become clearer,politicians have begun to clamp down.In Wisconsin the unions have rallied thousands of supporters against Scott Walker,the hardline Republican governor.But many within the public sector suffer under the current system,too.John Donahue at Harvard’s Kennedy School points out that the norms of culture in Western civil services suit those who want to stay put but is bad for high achievers.The only American public-sector workers who earn well above$250,000 a year are university sports coaches and the president of the United States.Bankers’fat pay packets have attracted much criticism,but a public-sector system that does not reward high achievers may be a much bigger problem for America.37.Which of the following is true of Paragraph 2?A.Public-sector unions are prudent in taking actions.B.Education is required for public-sector union membership.C.Labor Party has long been fighting against public-sector unions.D.Public-sector unions seldom get in trouble for their actions.
Text 4 If the trade unionist Jimmy Hoffa were alive today,he would probably represent civil servant.When Hoffa’s Teamsters were in their prime in 1960,only one in ten American government workers belonged to a union;now 36%do.In 2009 the number of unionists in America’s public sector passed that of their fellow members in the private sector.In Britain,more than half of public-sector workers but only about 15%of private-sector ones are unionized.There are three reasons for the public-sector unions’thriving.First,they can shut things down without suffering much in the way of consequences.Second,they are mostly bright and well-educated.A quarter of America’s public-sector workers have a university degree.Third,they now dominate left-of-centre politics.Some of their ties go back a long way.Britain’s Labor Party,as its name implies,has long been associated with trade unionism.Its current leader,Ed Miliband,owes his position to votes from public-sector unions.At the state level their influence can be even more fearsome.Mark Baldassare of the Public Policy Institute of California points out that much of the state’s budget is patrolled by unions.The teachers’unions keep an eye on schools,the CCPOA on prisons and a variety of labor groups on health care.In many rich countries average wages in the state sector are higher than in the private one.But the real gains come in benefits and work practices.Politicians have repeatedly“backloaded”public-sector pay deals,keeping the pay increases modest but adding to holidays and especially pensions that are already generous.Reform has been vigorously opposed,perhaps most egregiously in education,where charter schools,academies and merit pay all faced drawn-out battles.Even though there is plenty of evidence that the quality of the teachers is the most important variable,teachers’unions have fought against getting rid of bad ones and promoting good ones.As the cost to everyone else has become clearer,politicians have begun to clamp down.In Wisconsin the unions have rallied thousands of supporters against Scott Walker,the hardline Republican governor.But many within the public sector suffer under the current system,too.John Donahue at Harvard’s Kennedy School points out that the norms of culture in Western civil services suit those who want to stay put but is bad for high achievers.The only American public-sector workers who earn well above$250,000 a year are university sports coaches and the president of the United States.Bankers’fat pay packets have attracted much criticism,but a public-sector system that does not reward high achievers may be a much bigger problem for America.36.It can be learned from the first paragraph thatA.Teamsters still have a large body of members.B.Jimmy Hoffa used to work as a civil servant.C.unions have enlarged their public-sector membership.D.the government has improved its relationship with unionists.
In a rare unanimous ruling,the US Supreme Court has overturned the corruption conviction of a former Virginia governor,Robert McDonnell.But it did so while holding its nose at the ethics of his conduct,which included accepting gifts such as a Rolex watch and a Ferrari Automobile from a company seeking access to government.The high court’s decision said the judge in Mr.McDonnell’s trail failed to tell a jury that it must look only at his“official acts,”or the former governor’s decisions on“specific”and“unsettled”issues related to his duties.Merely helping a gift-giver gain access to other officials,unless done with clear intent to pressure those officials,is not corruption,the justices found.The court did suggest that accepting favors in return for opening doors is“distasteful”and“nasty.”But under anti-bribery laws,proof must be made of concrete benefits,such as approval of a contract or regulation.Simply arranging a meeting,making a phone call,or hosting an event is not an“official act.”The court’s ruling is legally sound in defining a kind of favoritism that is not criminal.Elected leaders must be allowed to help supporters deal with bureaucratic problems without fear of prosecution of bribery.“The basic compact underlying representative government,”wrote Chief Justice John Roberts for the court,“assumes that public officials will hear from their constituents and act on their concerns.”But the ruling reinforces the need for citizens and their elected representatives,not the courts,to ensure equality of access to government.Officials must not be allowed to play favorites in providing information or in arranging meetings simply because an individual or group provides a campaign donation or a personal gift.This type of integrity requires will-enforced laws in government transparency,such as records of official meetings,rules on lobbying,and information about each elected leader’s source of wealth.Favoritism in official access can fan public perceptions of corruption.But it is not always corruption.Rather officials must avoid double standards,or different types of access for average people and the wealthy.If connections can be bought,a basic premise of democratic society–that all are equal in treatment by government-is undermined.Good government rests on an understanding of the inherent worth of each individual.The court’s ruling is a step forward in the struggle against both corruption and official favoritism.The court’s ruling is d on the assumption that public officials are__A.allowed to focus on the concerns of their supporters.B.qualified to deal independently with bureaucratic issues.C.justified in addressing the needs of their constituents.D.exempt from conviction on the charge of favoritism.
Just how much does the Constitution protect your digital data?The Supreme Court will now consider whether police can search the contents of a mobile phone without a warrant if the phone is on or around a person during an arrest.California has asked the justices to refrain from a sweeping ruling particularly one that upsets the old assumption that authorities may search through the possessions of suspects at the time of their arrest.It is hard,the state argues,for judges to assess the implications of new and rapidly changing technologies.The court would be recklessly modest if it followed California’s advice.Enough of the implications are discernable,even obvious,so that the justices can and should provide updated guidelines to police,lawyers and defendants.They should start by discarding California’s lame argument that exploring the contents of a smart phone—a vast storehouse of digital information—is similar to,say,rifling through a suspect’s purse.The court has ruled that police don’t violate the Fourth Amendment when they sift through the wallet or pocketbook of an arrestee without a warrant.But exploring one’s smart phone is more like entering his or her home.A smart phone may contain an arrestee’s reading history,financial history,medical history and comprehensive records of recent correspondence.The development of“cloud computing,”meanwhile,has made that exploration so much the easier.Americans should take steps to protect their digital privacy.But keeping sensitive information on these devices is increasingly a requirement of normal life.Citizens still have a right to expect private documents to remain private and protected by the Constitution’s prohibition on unreasonable searches.As so often is the case,stating that principle doesn’t ease the challenge of line-drawing.In many cases,it would not be overly onerous for authorities to obtain a warrant to search through phone contents.They could still invalidate Fourth Amendment protections when facing severe,urgent circumstances,and they could take reasonable measures to ensure that phone data are not erased or altered while a warrant is pending.The court,though,may want to allow room for police to cite situations where they are entitled to more freedom.But the justices should not swallow California’s argument whole.New,disruptive technology sometimes demands novel applications of the Constitution’s protections.Orin Kerr,a law professor,compares the explosion and accessibility of digital information in the 21st century with the establishment of automobile use as a virtual necessity of life in the 20th:The justices had to specify novel rules for the new personal domain of the passenger car then;they must sort out how the Fourth Amendment applies to digital information now.The Supreme Court will work out whether,during an arrest,it is legitimate toA.prevent suspects from deleting their phone contents.B.search for suspects’mobile phones without a warrant.C.check suspects’phone contents without being authorized.D.prohibit suspects from using their mobile phones.
In a rare unanimous ruling,the US Supreme Court has overturned the corruption conviction of a former Virginia governor,Robert McDonnell.But it did so while holding its nose at the ethics of his conduct,which included accepting gifts such as a Rolex watch and a Ferrari Automobile from a company seeking access to government.The high court’s decision said the judge in Mr.McDonnell’s trail failed to tell a jury that it must look only at his“official acts,”or the former governor’s decisions on“specific”and“unsettled”issues related to his duties.Merely helping a gift-giver gain access to other officials,unless done with clear intent to pressure those officials,is not corruption,the justices found.The court did suggest that accepting favors in return for opening doors is“distasteful”and“nasty.”But under anti-bribery laws,proof must be made of concrete benefits,such as approval of a contract or regulation.Simply arranging a meeting,making a phone call,or hosting an event is not an“official act.”The court’s ruling is legally sound in defining a kind of favoritism that is not criminal.Elected leaders must be allowed to help supporters deal with bureaucratic problems without fear of prosecution of bribery.“The basic compact underlying representative government,”wrote Chief Justice John Roberts for the court,“assumes that public officials will hear from their constituents and act on their concerns.”But the ruling reinforces the need for citizens and their elected representatives,not the courts,to ensure equality of access to government.Officials must not be allowed to play favorites in providing information or in arranging meetings simply because an individual or group provides a campaign donation or a personal gift.This type of integrity requires will-enforced laws in government transparency,such as records of official meetings,rules on lobbying,and information about each elected leader’s source of wealth.Favoritism in official access can fan public perceptions of corruption.But it is not always corruption.Rather officials must avoid double standards,or different types of access for average people and the wealthy.If connections can be bought,a basic premise of democratic society–that all are equal in treatment by government-is undermined.Good government rests on an understanding of the inherent worth of each individual.The court’s ruling is a step forward in the struggle against both corruption and official favoritism.The author’s attitude toward the court’s ruling is____A.sarcastic.B.tolerant.C.skeptical.D.supportive.
The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in（）Aall kinds of casesBtwo kinds of casesCcases involving foreign citizensDcases involving a state
The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court（）Ahas much greater power than other justices of the Supreme CourtBhas no greater voting power than other justices of the Supreme CourtChas greater say in deciding a caseDhas greater voting power than other justices of the Supreme Court
In Ireland（）is the court of final appeal and plays a key role in the interpretation of the Constitution.Athe Supreme CourtBthe High CourtCthe Highest CourtDthe Central Court
The federal judicial system consists of （）Aone supreme court,11 courts of appeals and 91 district courtsBone supreme court,11 courts of appeals,89 district courts,3 courts of special jurisdictionCone supreme court,11 courts of appeals,91 district courts,3 courts of special jurisdictionDone supreme court,11 courts of appeals,91 district courts,2 courts for the District of Columbia and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico
In Ireland（）is the court of final appeal and plays a key role in the interpretation of the Constitution.A、the Supreme CourtB、the High CourtC、the Highest CourtD、the Central Court
单选题From the first three paragraphs, we learn that ______.Adoctors used to increase drug dosages to control their patients’ painBit is still illegal for doctors to help the dying end their livesCthe Supreme Court strongly opposes physician-assisted suicideDpatients have no constitutional right to commit suicide
单选题_____ has the power to impeach the President of the United States when he abuses his power.AThe SenateBThe Justice of the Supreme CourtCThe CongressDThe Supreme Court
单选题The federal judicial system consists of （）Aone supreme court,11 courts of appeals and 91 district courtsBone supreme court,11 courts of appeals,89 district courts,3 courts of special jurisdictionCone supreme court,11 courts of appeals,91 district courts,3 courts of special jurisdictionDone supreme court,11 courts of appeals,91 district courts,2 courts for the District of Columbia and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico
单选题The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court（）Ahas much greater power than other justices of the Supreme CourtBhas no greater voting power than other justices of the Supreme CourtChas greater say in deciding a caseDhas greater voting power than other justices of the Supreme Court
单选题In Ireland（）is the court of final appeal and plays a key role in the interpretation of the Constitution.Athe Supreme CourtBthe High CourtCthe Highest CourtDthe Central Court
单选题The first state court to rule that gays had a constitutional right to wed was ______.Athe Maryland’s Supreme CourtBthe Massachusetts’ Supreme CourtCthe New Mexico’s Supreme CourtDthe New Jersey’s Supreme Court
单选题The real power of the House of Lords lies in _____.Ahelping to pass Money BillsBdelaying billsCdiscussing billsDbeing Supreme Court