《2022年考博英语-华东政法大学考试题库及模拟押密卷44（含答案解析）》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《2022年考博英语-华东政法大学考试题库及模拟押密卷44（含答案解析）（41页珍藏版）》请在金锄头文库上搜索。
1、2022年考博英语-华东政法大学考试题库及模拟押密卷（含答案解析）1. 单选题I. JurisprudenceIt is practically impossible to imagine constitutional law without dissent. The very first opinion in the Charter era the Patriation Reference was marked by it. Dissent is powerful and evocative, even mythic; it suggests roads not taken and para
2、llel universes. It evokes a fundamental and, sometimes, unsettling contingency about law. It can be problematic, disrupting easy understandings of how to a court “gets it right” and, thus, damaging to a courts legitimacy.Yet, dissent has positive aspects, too. It can: better articulate norms and und
3、erstandings underlying key decision-rules; provide a counter-narrative to prevailing orthodoxy; lay the foundation for future development of law; provide a necessary outlet for disagreement that otherwise might constrain and frustrate judicial actors; and even secure broader acceptance of a majority
4、 decision by showing that it is a product of deliberation.In this paper, I present another possible “upside” to dissent that focuses on the issue in Quebec (Attorney General) v. A: equality. First, I canvass two ways that dissent manifests in Charter jurisprudence: one (functional) relating to the j
5、udiciarys appropriate role in constitutional disputes; and the other (principled) relating to the identification, scope or application of rules and norms. The two models are richly represented in equality jurisprudence. In the Supreme Courts first Section 15 case, Andrews v. Law Society of British C
6、olumbia, the Court divided over the functional question of how closely the Court should scrutinize legislated difference. In subsequent cases, the Court has struggled to reach consensus on the meaning of equality itself an issue of principle.The fact that equality jurisprudence has been characterize
7、d by chronic disagreement might appear unfortunate. But my review of section 15 case law suggests that, by providing the space to fully flesh out points of disagreement, dissent has contributed to richer accounts of equality. Borrowing the language of Cass Sunstein, I suggest that a divided equality
8、 decision that is the result of failure to reach agreement on “deep” issues is preferable to one that, as the price of unanimity, remains “shallow”. I conclude that the decision in Quebec (Attorney General) v. A is deep rather than shallow and so, despite its frustrating divisions, it is on the whol
9、e better than many of the unanimous equality decisions that preceded it.1.The author listed the following positive aspects of dissent BUT _.2.From the third paragraph, one can know the following BUT _.3.The author thinks that a divided equality decision is preferable because _.4.What is the most sui
10、table topic for these paragraphs?问题1选项A.It provides a counter-narrative to prevailing orthodoxyB.It can lay the foundation for future development of lawC.It can provide a necessary outlet for disagreementD.It can be damaging to a courts legitimacy问题2选项A.The author discusses the cases in which the fu
11、nction of dissents is obvious in two waysB.The subsequent cases were decided by consensusC.Andrews v. Law Society of British Columbia is a constitutional case relating to Section 15D.Andrews v. Law Society of British Columbia was not decided unanimously问题3选项A.it contributes to richer accounts of equ
12、alityB.it is deepC.it is on the whole betterD.is frustratingly divided问题4选项A.The Dissent in Equality JurisprudenceB.The Upside of DissentC.The Upside of Dissent in Equality JurisprudenceD.The Equality Jurisprudence【答案】第1题:D第2题:B第3题:B第4题:C【解析】1.事实细节题。根据题干定位到原文第一段It can be problematic, disrupting easy
13、 understandings of how to a court “gets it right” and, thus, damaging to a courts legitimacy.（它可能会造成问题，扰乱人们对法院如何“正确处理”的简单理解，从而损害法院的合法性）可知选D选项“它可能会损害法院的合法性”，D选项不属于积极的方面；根据题干关键词“positive aspects of dissent”定位到原文第二段Yet, dissent has positive aspects, too. It can: better articulate norms and understandin
14、gs underlying key decision-rules; provide a counter-narrative to prevailing orthodoxy; lay the foundation for future development of law; provide a necessary outlet for disagreement that otherwise might constrain and frustrate judicial actors;（然而，异议也有积极的一面。它可以：更好地阐明关键决策规则背后的规范和理解；对盛行的正统学说提供一种反叙事；为法律的
15、未来发展奠定基础；为可能限制和挫败司法行为人的分歧提供一个必要的发泄途径）可知A选项“它是对主流正统观念的一种反驳”，B选项“可以为法律的未来发展奠定基础”，C选项“它可以为分歧提供一个必要的出口”都属于积极的方面。因此D选项符合题意。2.事实细节题。根据题干定位到第三段In the Supreme Courts first Section 15 case, Andrews v. Law Society of British Columbia, the Court divided over the functional question of how closely the Court sho
16、uld scrutinize legislated difference. In subsequent cases, the Court has struggled to reach consensus on the meaning of equality itself an issue of principle.（在最高法院第15节的安德鲁斯诉不列颠哥伦比亚省法律协会案中，最高法院就法院应在多大程度上仔细审查立法上的差异这一功能问题存在分歧。在随后的案件中，最高法院一直在努力就平等本身的含义达成共识这是一个原则问题）可知B选项“随后的案件由协商一致决定”不符合原文，原文只是提到在随后的案件中，最高法院一直在努力就平等本身的含义达成共识，以及C选项“安德鲁斯诉英属哥伦比亚法律协会
