Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 26 May 2017, 08:27

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

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

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

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

Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 11 Jul 2012
Posts: 52
Followers: 12

Kudos [?]: 973 [1] , given: 0

In Winters v. United States (1908), the Supreme Court held [#permalink]

Show Tags

08 Aug 2012, 15:14
1
This post received
KUDOS
5
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Question 1
00:00

Question Stats:

35% (03:04) correct 65% (01:51) wrong based on 51

HideShow timer Statistics

Question 2
00:00

Question Stats:

61% (01:47) correct 39% (00:26) wrong based on 49

HideShow timer Statistics

Question 3
00:00

Question Stats:

39% (01:59) correct 61% (01:42) wrong based on 46

HideShow timer Statistics

In Winters v. United States (1908), the Supreme Court held that the right to use waters fl owing through or adjacent to the Fort Belknap Indian Reservation was reserved to American Indians by the treaty establishing the reservation. Although this treaty did not mention water rights, the Court ruled that the federal government, when it created the reservation,
intended to deal fairly with American Indians by reserving for them the waters without which their lands would have been useless. Later decisions, citing Winters, established that courts can find federal rights to reserve water for particular purposes if (1) the land in question lies within an enclave under exclusive federal jurisdiction, (2) the land has been formally withdrawn from federal public lands-i.e., withdrawn from the stock of federal lands available for private use under federal land use laws-and set aside or reserved, and (3) the circumstances reveal the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.

Some American Indian tribes have also established water rights through the courts based on their traditional diversion and use of certain waters prior to the United States’ acquisition of sovereignty. For example, the Rio Grande pueblos already existed when the United States acquired sovereignty over New Mexico in 1848. Although they at that time became
part of the United States, the pueblo lands never formally constituted a part of federal public lands; in any event, no treaty, statute, or executive order has ever designated or withdrawn the pueblos from public lands as American Indian reservations. This fact, however, has not barred application of the Winters doctrine. What constitutes an American Indian
reservation is a question of practice, not of legal definition, and the pueblos have always been treated as reservations by the United States. This pragmatic approach is buttressed by Arizona v. California (1963), wherein the Supreme Court indicated that the manner in which any type of federal reservation is created does not affect the application to it of the Winters doctrine. Therefore, the reserved water rights of Pueblo Indians have priority over other citizens’ water rights as of 1848, the year in which pueblos must be considered to have become reservations.
58. Which of the following most accurately summarizes the relationship between Arizona v. California in lines 38-42, and the criteria citing the Winters doctrine in lines 1O-20?
(A) Arizona v. California abolishes these criteria and establishes a competing set of criteria for applying the Winters doctrine.
(B) Arizona v. California establishes that the Winters doctrine applies to a broader range of situations than those defined by these criteria.
(C) Arizona v. California represents the sole example of an exception to the criteria as they were set forth in the Winters doctrine.
(D) Arizona v. California does not refer to the Winters doctrine to justify water rights, whereas these criteria do rely on the Winters doctrine.
(E) Arizona v. California applies the criteria derived from the Winters doctrine only to federal lands other than American Indian reservations.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
B

59. The "pragmatic approach" mentioned in lines 59-61 of the passage is best defined as one that
(A) grants recognition to reservations that were never formally established but that have traditionally been treated as such
(B) determines the water rights of all citizens in a particular region by examining the actual history of water usage in that region
(C) gives federal courts the right to reserve water along with land even when it is clear that the government originally intended to reserve only the land
(D) bases the decision to recognize the legal rights of a group on the practical effect such a recognition is likely to have on other citizens
(E) dictates that courts ignore precedents set by such cases as Winters v. United States in deciding what water rights belong to reserved land

[Reveal] Spoiler:
A

62. The passage suggests that the legal rights of citizens other than American Indians to the use of water flowing into the Rio Grande pueblos are
(A) guaranteed by the precedent set in Arizona v. California
(B) abolished by the Winters doctrine
(C) deferred to the Pueblo Indians whenever treaties explicitly require this
(D) guaranteed by federal land-use laws
(E) limited by the prior claims of the Pueblo Indians

[Reveal] Spoiler:
E

[Reveal] Spoiler: Question #1 OA
[Reveal] Spoiler: Question #2 OA
[Reveal] Spoiler: Question #3 OA
If you have any questions
you can ask an expert
New!
Intern
Joined: 20 May 2012
Posts: 20
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Strategy
GMAT 1: 690 Q47 V37
WE: Engineering (Manufacturing)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 10 [1] , given: 2

Re: In Winters v. United States (1908), the Supreme Court held [#permalink]

Show Tags

15 Aug 2012, 18:14
1
This post received
KUDOS
This is probably the most intimidating RC in the whole of OG-12
Intern
Joined: 17 Dec 2012
Posts: 4
Location: United States
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Operations
GMAT 1: 640 Q49 V29
GPA: 3.5
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 3

Re: In Winters v. United States (1908), the Supreme Court held [#permalink]

Show Tags

28 May 2013, 12:56
B-A-E.....got 3/3...lucky me!!
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10367
Followers: 999

Kudos [?]: 225 [0], given: 0

Re: In Winters v. United States (1908), the Supreme Court held [#permalink]

Show Tags

02 Nov 2014, 04:38
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Senior Manager
Joined: 08 Dec 2015
Posts: 299
GMAT 1: 600 Q44 V27
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 17 [1] , given: 36

Re: In Winters v. United States (1908), the Supreme Court held [#permalink]

Show Tags

11 May 2016, 15:55
1
This post received
KUDOS
Omg, took me 8 min, got 2 Qs correct and honestly, I didn't understand a flying duck about the passage...
Manager
Joined: 17 Oct 2015
Posts: 119
Location: India
Concentration: Finance
Schools: ISB '18 (S)
GMAT 1: 690 Q47 V37
GMAT 2: 700 Q44 V41
WE: Corporate Finance (Commercial Banking)
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 36 [1] , given: 317

Re: In Winters v. United States (1908), the Supreme Court held [#permalink]

Show Tags

20 Jul 2016, 10:01
1
This post received
KUDOS
iliavko dont worry you're not alone
Intern
Joined: 30 Apr 2017
Posts: 3
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 2

Re: In Winters v. United States (1908), the Supreme Court held [#permalink]

Show Tags

11 May 2017, 16:43
iliavko wrote:
Omg, took me 8 min, got 2 Qs correct and honestly, I didn't understand a flying duck about the passage...

i got depressed after that so haaaaard
Re: In Winters v. United States (1908), the Supreme Court held   [#permalink] 11 May 2017, 16:43
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
5 The beginning of what was to become the United States 5 23 May 2017, 00:19
Winters v. United States (1908), 1 15 Apr 2014, 12:16
1 The Constitution of the United States does not explicitly 8 27 Aug 2014, 02:27
1 From the Kaplan practice test A 1973 Supreme Court 6 20 Sep 2014, 09:26
53 In Winters v. United States (1908), the Supreme Court held t 46 13 Apr 2017, 09:25
Display posts from previous: Sort by

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

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

 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®.