Reading Comprehension Text 4
In a rare unanimous ruling, the US Supreme Court has overturned the corruption conviction of a former Virginia governor, Robert McDonnell. But it did so while holding its nose at the ethics of his conduct, which included accepting gifts such as a Rolex watch and a Ferrari Automobile from a company seeking access to government.
The high court’s decision said the judge in Mr. McDonnell’s trial failed to tell a jury that it must look only at his “official acts,” or the former governor’s decisions on “specific” and “unsettled” issues related to his duties.
Merely helping a gift-giver gain access to other officials, unless done with clear intent to pressure those officials, is not corruption, the justices found.
The court did suggest that accepting favors in return for opening doors is “distasteful” and “nasty”. But under anti-bribery laws, proof must be made of concrete benefits, such as approval of a contract or regulation. Simply arranging a meeting, making a phone call, or hosting an event is not an “official act.”
The court’s ruling is legally sound in defining a kind of favoritism that is not criminal. Elected leaders must be allowed to help supporters deal with bureaucratic problems without fear of prosecution of bribery. “The basic compact underlying representative government,” wrote Chief Justice John Roberts for the court, “assumes that public officials will hear from their constituents and act on their concerns.”
But the ruling reinforces the need for citizens and their elected representatives, not the courts, to ensure equality of access to government. Officials must not be allowed to play favorites in providing information or in arranging meetings simply because an individual or group provides a campaign donation or a personal gift. This type of integrity requires well-enforced laws in government transparency, such as records of official meetings, rules on lobbying, and information about each elected leader’s source of wealth.
Favoritism in official access can fan public perceptions of corruption. But it is not always corruption. Rather officials must avoid double standards, or different types of access for average people and the wealthy. If connections can be bought, a basic premise of democratic society—that all are equal in treatment by government—is undermined. Good governance rests on an understanding of the inherent worth of each individual.
The court’s ruling is a step forward in the struggle against both corruption and official favoritism.
36. The underlined sentence (Para.1) most probably shows that the court
37. According to Paragraph 4, an official act is deemed corruptive only if it involves
38. The court’s ruling is based on the assumption that public officials are
39. Well-enforced laws in government transparency are needed to
40. The author’s attitude toward the court’s ruling is
答案与解析 (Answers)
36. [C] was contemptuous of McDonnell’s conduct.
解析：第一段划线处提到最高法院虽然推翻了定罪，但却是“holding its nose at the ethics of his conduct（由于恶心而捂着鼻子）”，这形象地表达了法庭对麦克唐纳行为的“蔑视和厌恶（contemptuous）”。
37. [C] concrete returns for gift-givers.
解析：第四段指出，单纯的引荐或安排会议不算腐败，只有证明了“concrete benefits（具体的利益回报）”，如批准合同或规章时，才构成贿赂。因此选 concrete returns。
38. [A] justified in addressing the needs of their constituents.
解析：第五段末尾引用首席大法官 Roberts 的话：代议制政府的基础是假设公职人员会听取“constituents（选民）”的意见并就其关切采取行动。这说明官员处理选民需求是正当的（justified）。
39. [B] guarantee fair play in official access.
解析：第六段提到，需要公开透明的法律（government transparency）来确保“equality of access to government（接触政府的机会平等）”，即保证在接触官员时的公平竞争（fair play）。
40. [D] supportive.
解析：文章末尾最后一句明确总结：“The court’s ruling is a step forward...（法庭的裁决是向前迈进的一步）”，体现了作者对这一裁决的“支持（supportive）”态度。
核心长难句精解 (Highlighted Sentences)
1. 形象化习语的使用：
"But it did so while holding its nose at the ethics of his conduct, which included accepting gifts..."
【解析】holding its nose at 是点睛之笔，原意是由于难闻而捂住鼻子，引申为“虽然厌恶、反感但不得不接受”。which 引导定语从句解释具体行为。
【翻译】但法庭在这样做（推翻定罪）的同时，对他行为的道德性表现出了厌恶，麦克唐纳的行为包括接受来自一家寻求政府准入的公司的礼物。
"But it did so while holding its nose at the ethics of his conduct, which included accepting gifts..."
【解析】holding its nose at 是点睛之笔，原意是由于难闻而捂住鼻子，引申为“虽然厌恶、反感但不得不接受”。which 引导定语从句解释具体行为。
【翻译】但法庭在这样做（推翻定罪）的同时，对他行为的道德性表现出了厌恶，麦克唐纳的行为包括接受来自一家寻求政府准入的公司的礼物。
2. 法律定义的严谨性：
"Merely helping a gift-giver gain access to other officials, unless done with clear intent to pressure those officials, is not corruption..."
【解析】gain access to 接近/接触。unless 引导条件状语从句。这句话划定了“引荐”与“腐败”的法律界限：除非有明显的施压意图，否则单纯的引荐不是腐败。
【翻译】最高法院的法官们发现，仅仅帮助送礼者接触其他官员，除非带有明显的向那些官员施压的意图，否则不属于腐败。
"Merely helping a gift-giver gain access to other officials, unless done with clear intent to pressure those officials, is not corruption..."
【解析】gain access to 接近/接触。unless 引导条件状语从句。这句话划定了“引荐”与“腐败”的法律界限：除非有明显的施压意图，否则单纯的引荐不是腐败。
【翻译】最高法院的法官们发现，仅仅帮助送礼者接触其他官员，除非带有明显的向那些官员施压的意图，否则不属于腐败。
3. 民主社会的政治前提：
"If connections can be bought, a basic premise of democratic society—that all are equal in treatment by government—is undermined."
【解析】premise 前提。破折号中间是 that 引导的同位语从句，解释说明前提的内容。undermine 是核心词，意为“破坏/削弱”。
【翻译】如果人脉关系可以被收买，那么民主社会的一个基本前提——即所有人在接受政府对待时都是平等的——就会被动摇。
"If connections can be bought, a basic premise of democratic society—that all are equal in treatment by government—is undermined."
【解析】premise 前提。破折号中间是 that 引导的同位语从句，解释说明前提的内容。undermine 是核心词，意为“破坏/削弱”。
【翻译】如果人脉关系可以被收买，那么民主社会的一个基本前提——即所有人在接受政府对待时都是平等的——就会被动摇。