Many Americans regard the jury system asa concrete expression of crucial democratic values, including the principlesthat all citizens who meet minimal qualifications of age and literacy areequally competent to serve on juries; that jurors should be selected randomlyfrom a representative cross section of the community; that no citizen should bedenied the right to serve on a jury on account of race, religion，sex，ornational origin;that defendants are entitled totrial by their peers; and that verdicts should represent the conscience of thecommunity and not just the letter of the law. The jury is also said to be thebest surviving example of direct rather than representative democracy. In adirect democracy, citizens take turns governing themselves, rather thanelecting representatives to govern for them.

　　But as recently as in 1968, juryselection procedures conflicted with these democratic ideals. In some states,for example, jury duty was limited to persons of supposedly superiorintelligence, education, and moral character. Although the Supreme Court of theUnited States had prohibited intentional racial discrimination in juryselection as early as the 1880 case of Strauder v. West Virginia, the practiceof selecting so-called elite or blue-ribbon juries provided a convenient wayaround this and other antidiscrimination laws.

　　The system also failed to regularlyinclude women on juries until the mid-20th century. Although women first servedon state juries in Utahin 1898, it was not until the 1940s that a majority of states made womeneligible for jury duty. Even then several states automatically exempted womenfrom jury duty unless they personally asked to have their names included on thejury list. This practice was justified by the claim that women were needed athome, and it kept juries unrepresentative of women through the 1960s.

　　In 1968, the Congress of theUnited Statespassed the Jury Selection and Service Act, ushering in a new era of democraticreforms for the jury. This law abolished special educational requirements forfederal jurors and required them to be selected at random from a cross sectionof the entire community. In the landmark 1975 decision Taylorv. Louisiana,the Supreme Court extended the requirement that juries be representative of allparts of the community to the state level. The Taylor decision also declared sexdiscrimination in jury selection to be unconstitutional and ordered states touse the same procedures for selecting male and female jurors.

　　36.From theprinciples of the US jury system ，welearn that _________.

　　[A]both literate and illiterate peoplecan sever on juries

　　[B]defendants are immune from trial bytheir peers

　　[C] no age limit should be imposed forjury service

　　[D]judgment should consider the opinionof the public

　　37.The practiceof selecting so-called elite jurors prior to 1968 showed_________

　　[A]the inadequacy of antidiscriminatationlaws

　　[B]the prevalent discrimination againstcertain races

　　[C]the conflicting ideals in jury selectionprocedures

　　[D]the arrogance common among the supremeCourt judges

　　38.Even in the1960s,women were seldom on the jury list in some states because

　　______

　　[A]they were automatically banned by statelaws

　　[B]they fell far short of the requiredqualifications

　　[C]they were supposed to perform domesticduties

　　[D]the lended to evade public engagement

　　39.After theJury Selection and Service Act was passed________

　　[A]sex discrimination in jury selectionwas unconstitutional and ha to be abolished

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

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

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

　　40. Indiscussing theUSjury 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

　　參考答案：DACCD

　　相關推薦：

　　全國各大EMBA名校學費匯總

　　2018年各EMBA院校招生簡章匯總