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 1986, 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 so-called elite or blue-ribbon juries provided a convenient way around this and other antidiscrimination laws.

The system also failed to regularly include women on juries until the mid-20th 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 personlly 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.

36.From the principles of theUS jury system,welearn that ______

[A]both litcrate and illiterate people can serve on juries

[B]defendants are immune from trial by their peers

[C]no age limit should be imposed for jury service

[D]judgment should consider the opinion of the public

37.The practice of selecting so-called elite jurors prior to 1968 showed_____

[A]the inadcquavy of antidiscrimination laws

[B]the prevalent discrimination against certain races

[C]the conflicting ideals in jury selection procedures

38.Even in the 1960s,women were seldom on the jury list in some states because_____

[A]they were automatically banned by state laws

[B]they fell far short of the required qualifications

[C]they were supposed to perform domestic duties

[D]they tended to evade public engagement

39.After the Jury Selection and Service Act was passed.___

[A]sex discrimination in jury selection was unconstitutional and had to be abolished

[B]educational requirements became less rigid in the selection of federal jurors

[C]jurors at the state level ought to be representative of the entire community

[D]states ought to conform to the federal court in reforming the jury system

40.in discussing the US jury system,the text centers on_______

[A]its nature and problems

[B]its characteristics and tradition

[C]its problems and their solutions

[D]its tradition and development
 

本文讲述了美国司法中陪审制度的发展历程。

第一段提出了作为民主价值重要体现的陪审制度的主要原则。第二、三段则讲述了陪审团制度在历史实践中存在的不民主现象，比如遴选程序中的教育歧视、种族歧视及性别歧视。最后一段讲述了美国陪审团制度1968年来的改革和发展。

36.【答案】D

【解析】文章第一段提到了美国陪审团制度的原则。根据“ verdicts should represent theconscience of the communiti判决应该代表公众的良知，可知D项是原文的同意替换，所以D项为正确笞案。

A、C项与原文“ all citizens who meet minimal qualifications of age and literacy are equallycompetent to serve onJunies”所有具备的年齡和读写能力资格的人都有资格担当陪审员，文意矛盾，B项与原文“ defendants are entitiledto trial by their peers被告有权接受同阶审判，文意矛盾，故排除此三项。

37.【答案】A

【解析】本题可定位到第二段的最后一句话: Although the Supreme Court，; the practice ofelecting so-called eliteor blue-ribbon juries provided a convenient way around this and other antidiscrimination ws然美国法院选拔所谓的精英或一流的陪审团给这种或其他反歧视法提供了方便之路。”习语表达around”是分析本题目的关键，所以C项为正确答案。

B项“对某个种族的普遍歧视”，过于宽泛，故为干扰项。C项“陪审员挑选过程中的相互冲突的理念”，与原文不符。D项文中没有提到，属无中生有

38.【答案】C

【解析】文章第三段的最后一句“ This practice was justified by the claim that women wereneeded at hon提到“家庭需要女性的主张给这一情况提供了辩解”，所以C项为正确笞案A项是偷换概念，原文是“ Even then several statef而非“ states1aws'”。B、D两项中文中并未提及属无中生有

39.【答案】B

【解析】文章第四段第二句话“ his law abolished special educational requirements for federalfrom a cross section of the entire community”其中的天键表达是abolished special educationalrequirements”，与B项中的“ became less rigid'相近。所以B项为正确答案C、D项都是发生在1975年泰勒诉路易斯安那的裁决之后，故均可排除。

40.【答案】D

【解析】本题考察对中心思想的归纳和概括能力，正确选项的关键在于理解文章四个段落的主要内容和相互联章第一段概括介绍了美国陪审制度的五个原则，第二、三、四段分别介绍了美国陪审制度的发展，包括陪审员的挑选、女性陪审员地位的变化以及教育和性别要求的变化，因此可以看出，文章主要是介绍美国陪审制度的历史和展。所以D项为正确答案。

A、B两项中的 nature和 characteristics属于首段信息，根据第二段首句的转折词But可知它不是文章中的重点因素。C项有一定的迷惑性，但忽略了文章中的时间因素 As recently as in196第二段he mid-20th century第三段)和 ushering a new erd尾段)等，所以也不应该选。