单选题
2分
Text 4 Many Americans regard the jury system as a concrete expression of crucial democratic values,...
Text 4
Many Americans regard the jury system as a concrete expression of crucial democratic values, including the principles that all citizens who meet minimal qualifications of age and literacy are equally competent to serve on juries; that jurors should be selected randomly from a representative cross section of the community; that no citizen should be denied the right to serve on a jury on account of race, religion, sex, or national origin; that defendants are entitled to trial by their peers; and that verdicts should represent the conscience of the community and not just the letter of the law. The jury is also said to be the best surviving example of direct rather than representative democracy. In a direct democracy, citizens take turns governing themselves, rather than electing representatives to govern for them.
But as recently as in 1968, jury selection procedures conflicted with these democratic ideals. In some states, for example, jury duty was limited to persons of supposedly superior intelligence, education, and moral character. Although the Supreme Court of the United States had prohibited intentional racial discrimination in jury selection as early as the 1880 case of Strauder v. West Virginia, the practice of selecting socalled elite or blueribbon juries provided a convenient way around this and other antidiscrimination laws.
The system also failed to regularly include women on juries until the mid20th century. Although women first served on state juries in Utah in 1898, it was not until the 1940s that a majority of states made women eligible for jury duty. Even then several states automatically exempted women from jury duty unless they personally asked to have their names included on the jury list. This practice was justified by the claim that women were needed at home, and it kept juries unrepresentative of women through the 1960s.
In 1968, the Congress of the United States passed the Jury Selection and Service Act, ushering in a new era of democratic reforms for the jury. This law abolished special educational requirements for federal jurors and required them to
be selected at random from a cross section of the entire community. In the landmark 1975 decision Taylor v.Louisiana, the
Supreme Court extended the requirement that juries be representative of all parts of the community to the state level. The Taylor decision also declared sex discrimination in jury selection to be unconstitutional and ordered states to use the same procedures for selecting male and female jurors.
38. Even in the 1960s, women were seldom on the jury list in some states because .
Many Americans regard the jury system as a concrete expression of crucial democratic values, including the principles that all citizens who meet minimal qualifications of age and literacy are equally competent to serve on juries; that jurors should be selected randomly from a representative cross section of the community; that no citizen should be denied the right to serve on a jury on account of race, religion, sex, or national origin; that defendants are entitled to trial by their peers; and that verdicts should represent the conscience of the community and not just the letter of the law. The jury is also said to be the best surviving example of direct rather than representative democracy. In a direct democracy, citizens take turns governing themselves, rather than electing representatives to govern for them.
But as recently as in 1968, jury selection procedures conflicted with these democratic ideals. In some states, for example, jury duty was limited to persons of supposedly superior intelligence, education, and moral character. Although the Supreme Court of the United States had prohibited intentional racial discrimination in jury selection as early as the 1880 case of Strauder v. West Virginia, the practice of selecting socalled elite or blueribbon juries provided a convenient way around this and other antidiscrimination laws.
The system also failed to regularly include women on juries until the mid20th century. Although women first served on state juries in Utah in 1898, it was not until the 1940s that a majority of states made women eligible for jury duty. Even then several states automatically exempted women from jury duty unless they personally asked to have their names included on the jury list. This practice was justified by the claim that women were needed at home, and it kept juries unrepresentative of women through the 1960s.
In 1968, the Congress of the United States passed the Jury Selection and Service Act, ushering in a new era of democratic reforms for the jury. This law abolished special educational requirements for federal jurors and required them to
be selected at random from a cross section of the entire community. In the landmark 1975 decision Taylor v.Louisiana, the
Supreme Court extended the requirement that juries be representative of all parts of the community to the state level. The Taylor decision also declared sex discrimination in jury selection to be unconstitutional and ordered states to use the same procedures for selecting male and female jurors.
38. Even in the 1960s, women were seldom on the jury list in some states because .
参考答案: C
参考解析: 推理题
【命题思路】这是一道原因推理题,考生在回文定位之后可以通过同义词替换推理出正确答案。
【直击答案】根据题干定位到第三段末句。句中“this practice”指代陪审团中没有女性成员这一情况,即题干中 的“women were seldom on the jury list”,而“was justified”即后面的 claim,表明理由。C 项为正确答案,“perform domestic duties”和原文中的“needed at home”所表达的含义一致。
【干扰排除】第三段“it was not until… for jury duty.”中“made women eligible”(使女性具有资格)与 A 项中的“they were banned”(她们被禁止)含义完全相反。第一段在陈述陪审团制度原则的时候提到了对年龄和教育背景的资格 限制,但并没有提及具体的限制内容,B 项属于无中生有。第三段第三句体现出很多女性会积极的要求参加陪 审团,而并非 D 项所说她们会逃避公共活动。