26考研:英语一阅读答案解析分享

下面给大家分享的是26考研:英语一阅读答案解析分享，真题可以帮助考生了解考试的具体题型，从而在复习过程中对不同题型进行有针对性的训练。下面的文章内容供各位考生参考，希望可以帮到大家。

26考研:英语一阅读答案解析分享

Text 4

On a five to three vote, the Supreme Court knocked out much of Arizona’s immigration law Monday—a modest policy victory for the Obama Administration. But on the more important matter of the Constitution, the decision was an 8-0 defeat for the Administration’s effort to upset the balance of power between the federal government and the states.

In Arizona v. United States, the majority overturned three of the four contested provisions of Arizona’s controversial plan to have state and local police enforce federal immigration law. The Constitutional principles that Washington alone has the power to “establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization” and that federal laws precede state laws are noncontroversial. Arizona had attempted to fashion state policies that ran parallel to the existing federal ones.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and the Court’s liberals, ruled that the state flew too close to the federal sun. On the overturned provisions the majority held that Congress had deliberately “occupied the field,” and Arizona had thus intruded on the federal’s privileged powers.

However, the Justices said that Arizona police would be allowed to verify the legal status of people who come in contact with law enforcement. That’s because Congress has always envisioned joint federal-state immigration enforcement and explicitly encourages state officers to share information and cooperate with federal colleagues.

Two of the three objecting Justice—Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas—agreed with this Constitutional logic but disagreed about which Arizona rules conflicted with the federal statute. The only major objection came from Justice Antonin Scalia, who offered an even more robust defense of state privileges going back to the Alien and Sedition Acts.

The 8-0 objection to President Obama turns on what Justice Samuel Alito describes in his objection as “a shocking assertion of federal executive power.” The White House argued that Arizona’s laws conflicted with its enforcement priorities, even if state laws complied with federal statutes to the letter. In effect, the White House claimed that it could invalidate any otherwise legitimate state law that it disagrees with.

Some powers do belong exclusively to the federal government, and control of citizenship and the borders is among them. But if Congress wanted to prevent states from using their own resources to check immigration status, it could. It never did so. The administration was in essence asserting that because it didn’t want to carry out Congress’s immigration wishes, no state should be allowed to do so either. Every Justice rightly rejected this remarkable claim.

21. Three provisions of Arizona’s plan were overturned because they

A overstepped the authority of federal immigration law. B disturbed the power balance between different states. C deprived the federal police of Constitutional powers. D contradicted both the federal and state policies.

22. On which of the following did the Justices agree, according to Paragraph 4? A States’ independence from federal immigration law.

B Federal officers’ duty to withhold immigrants’ information. C States’ legitimate role in immigration enforcement.

D Congress’s intervention in immigration enforcement.

23. It can be inferred from Paragraph 5 that the Alien and Sedition Acts A violated the Constitution.

B stood in favor of the states. C supported the federal statute.

D undermined the states’ interests.

24. The White House claims that its power of enforcement A outweighs that held by the states.

B is established by federal statutes. C is dependent on the states’ support. D rarely goes against state laws.

25. What can be learned from the last paragraph?

A Immigration issues are usually decided by Congress.

B The Administration is dominant over immigration issues.

C Justices wanted to strengthen its coordination with Congress. D Justices intended to check the power of the Administration.

Text 4

30. 【答案解析】正确答案是 A。细节题。根据题干已知信息 Three provisions of Arizona’ plan 及overturned 定位到第二段第一句。该句指出了“州计划的三项条款被推翻”这一结果。第二句和第三句论述了产生这一结果的原因：宪法规定仅华盛顿有权“建立统一的归化条例”，而且联邦法律高于各州法律，而亚利桑那州却试图制定与现存联邦政策并行的州政策。由此可知，州计划的三项条款被推翻就是因为它谮越了联邦移民法的权威，A 是答案。

31. 【答案解析】正确答案是C。细节题。根据题干已知信息 Justices 定位到第四段首句：法官们说允许亚利桑那州警方核实移民的合法身份，换言之，法官们赞同各州在移民执法中的合法权力，所以 C 选项正确。

32. 【答案解析】正确答案是 B。细节题。根据题干已知信息 the Alien and Sedition Acts 定位到第五段末句。state privileges going back to the Alien and Sedition Acts 意思为“州特权可追溯到the Alien and Sedition Acts 法案”，可见the Alien and Sedition Acts 支持的是州的权利。B 是defense of state privileges 的同义表达，所以B 正确。

33. 【答案解析】正确答案是 A。细节题。根据题干已知信息 the White House 定位

到第六段最后两句：白宫声称亚利桑那州的法律条文严格遵守了联邦法律法规，但是它制订的这些法律与联邦政府的执法优先权相冲突，实际上它能够使任何它不同意的州法律不合法，也就是说，在执法权力上，应是联邦政府优先。由此可见“白宫的执行力大于州执行力”，A 是对第六段主旨的高度概括，所以 A 正确。

34. 【答案解析】正确答案是 D。主旨题。倒数第二句指出联邦政府断言只要自己不愿履行国会的移民意愿，他也有权阻止各州履行。最后一句指出，每一位大法官都拒绝了这个要求。因此法院裁决意在打击奥巴马政府滥用行政权，限制其滥权之举，所以D 是正确答案。

【全文翻译】

周一，美最高法院以 5：3 的投票结果否决了亚利桑那州移民法的大部分条款，这是奥巴马政府政策上的一次微弱胜利。然而，在更重要的宪法问题上，最高法院以全部8票否定了奥巴马政府在打破联邦权力与各州权力的平衡问题上所做的努力。

在亚利桑那州与联邦政府的这场较量中，多数法官推翻了颇具争议亚利桑那州移民法案(命令州级和地方警察执行联邦移民法)中四项受质疑条款里的三项。只有华盛顿才有权“制定统一的归化条例”以及联邦法律优先于州级法律，这两条宪法原则是毋庸置疑的。亚利桑那州已企图制定与现行联邦法律并行的州政策。

大法官安东尼·肯尼迪，连同首席法官约翰·罗伯特和法院的自由党派法官裁定亚利桑那州肆意挑衅联邦权威。在被推翻的条款中，美国国会故意“把持了移民法案这一领域的立法权”，亚利桑那州因此才冒犯了联邦特权。

然而，法官们说亚利桑那的警察可以核查疑似非法移民者的身份。那是因为国会总是构想未来联邦和州政府在移民政策上能够通力合作，并且明确鼓励州官员与联邦同事互通信息并彼此合作。

三个持反对意见的法官中，法官塞缪尔·艾力图和克莱伦斯·托马斯一致认同宪法逻辑，但是对于究竟亚利桑那的哪一条法律与联邦法律相冲突却有不同的意见。唯一主要的反对者是法官安通尼·斯卡利亚，他为可以追溯到《外国人与煽动叛乱法案》的州级特权进行了更加强有力的辩护。

最高法院这项针对奥巴马总统的 8:0 的反对裁决原因在于“令人震惊的对联邦政府执政权力的维护”，诚如塞缪尔·阿里托在其反对意见中所述。白宫声称尽管州法律在条文上遵循了联邦法律，但是亚利桑那州的法律却与其执法优先权相冲突。事实上，白宫声称它能废除任何虽合法但是不被白宫认可的州级法律。

一些权力的的确确只归联邦所有，比如国籍和边界的控制权。但是如果国会想要阻止州政府使用自己的资源去核查移民者身份的话，它是可以做到的。但它从未这么做。实际上，奥巴马政府在声称，因为它不想执行国会在移民事务上的意愿，所以各州也都不允许执行。最高法院的每位法官都理当抵制这一惊。

具体信息请考生关注院校官网等发布的官方消息。

26考研:英语一阅读答案解析分享是今天带来的全部内容，真题可以作为检验复习效果的重要工具，帮助考生及时了解自己的学习进度和水平。考生们如果还想了解其他考研内容，可以继续关注启航教育。

推荐阅读：

考研日期是哪天?25考研具体时间

考研总分多少,26硕士研究生招生考试总分是多少