GMAT Question of the Day: Daily via email | Daily via Instagram New to GMAT Club? Watch this Video

It is currently 03 Apr 2020, 19:39

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.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

In its 1903 decision in the case of Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, the United

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 16 Aug 2019
Posts: 93
In its 1903 decision in the case of Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, the United  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Feb 2020, 02:48
Hi gmatter0913
gmatter0913 wrote:
Can somebody explain me the details of this passage in simple language?

I struggled to understand the sentence below.

"In his study of the Lone
Wolf case, Blue Clark properly
emphasizes the Court’s assertion
(10) of a virtually unlimited unilateral power
of Congress (the House of Represen-
tatives and the Senate) over Native
American affairs. "

Does this mean that Clark is pointing that the Congress (Senate and HOR) has used its law-making power unjustly against the tribes??



For “unlimited unilateral power”, we should first see the meaning of “unilateral”:
(of an action or decision)performed by or affecting only one person, group, or country involved in a situation, without the agreement of another or the other
Its meaning is similar to “unlimited one-side power”,
So yes, it indeed does saying that“Clark is pointing that the Congress (Senate and HOR) has used its law-making power unjustly against the tribes”
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 16 Aug 2019
Posts: 93
In its 1903 decision in the case of Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, the United  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Feb 2020, 03:06
Hi shabuzen102
shabuzen102 wrote:
Dear Expert,

I have problems with Question 2 - why did they have to add the word "sometimes"?
So sometimes they negotiated, but other times they'd hostile take over??

How can I interpret it? Thanks!



I try to explain,however I don’t know whether its correct or not

shortly after Lone Wolf, the federal government totally abandoned negotiation and execution of formal written agreements with Indian tribes as a prerequisite for the implementation of federal Indian policy. “Many commentators believe that this change had already occurred in 1871” when

thus, in 1871 the federal government totally abandoned negotiation….
 Before 1871, NOT totally abandonedprior to 1871, the federal government “sometimes” negotiated treaties with Native
American tribes.
GMAT Club Bot
In its 1903 decision in the case of Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, the United   [#permalink] 09 Feb 2020, 03:06

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 22 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

In its 1903 decision in the case of Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, the United

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  





Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne