Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 16 Apr 2014, 02:32

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

In Winters v. United States (1908), the Supreme Court held t

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Intern
Intern
Joined: 27 Sep 2013
Posts: 8
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

Re: In Winters v. United States (1908), the Supreme Court held t [#permalink] New post 14 Dec 2013, 12:17
9 minutes 14 seconds.

A
E
D
B

Can anyone explain why #2 is C?
Manager
Manager
Joined: 04 Oct 2013
Posts: 78
Location: Brazil
Schools: CBS '16
GMAT 1: 660 Q45 V35
GMAT 2: 710 Q49 V38
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 33

Re: In Winters v. United States (1908), the Supreme Court held t [#permalink] New post 15 Dec 2013, 09:49
Tough one. This question is testing your Critical Reasoning skills more than anything. The question asks: if X (criteria discussed in lines 16-32), then what MUST BE TRUE? Therefore, approach it as if it were a MUST BE TRUE Critical reasoning question.

What are the premises?

Everything stated in X - the criterias(!):

To guarantee water rights, the land needs to...

(1) the land in question lies within an enclave under exclusive federal jurisdiction,
(2) the land has been formally withdrawn from federal public lands — i.e., withdrawn from the stock of federal lands available for private use under federal land use laws — and set aside or reserved, and
(3) the circumstances reveal the government intended to reserve water as well as land when establishing the reservation.

Now, take a look a at what answer C says (the conclusion):

C. There would be no legal basis for the water rights of the Rio Grande pueblos. - Wait a minute! The second paragraph says that the Rio Grande Pueblo "never formally constituted a part of federal public land". Now look at what premise (1) states. Therefore, Rio Grande Pueblos would never be awarted water rights, as they were not part of a federal jurisdiction.

I hope it helps,



madman91 wrote:
9 minutes 14 seconds.

A
E
D
B

Can anyone explain why #2 is C?
Re: In Winters v. United States (1908), the Supreme Court held t   [#permalink] 15 Dec 2013, 09:49
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
New posts According to a ruling by the state supreme court, the owner ywilfred 2 02 Sep 2005, 05:16
New posts In Winters v. United States (1908), the Supreme Court held betterscore 2 08 Aug 2012, 14:14
New posts 3 In the mid-1990s the United States Supreme Court rendered a Tagger 9 24 Apr 2013, 04:04
New posts In Winters v. United States (1908), the Supreme Court held josepradeep 0 17 Jul 2013, 11:26
This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies. New Experts publish their posts in the topic Winters v. United States (1908), royQV 1 15 Apr 2014, 04:58
Display posts from previous: Sort by

In Winters v. United States (1908), the Supreme Court held t

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 22 posts ] 



GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.