题目内容
甲题： 刘某买了一处房子，办理房屋过户手续后，满心欢喜搬进新房居住，不料，该房却是房主通过中介公司出租给他人，租房者伪造了全套房产材料，甚至骗过北京市建委，将房屋过户出售。事发后，原房主状告北京市建委，法院一纸撤销判决，令崭新的房产证变成了废纸。无奈之下，购房者状告建委，要求未尽审查义务的房管所承担国家赔偿责任。但其请求未获法院支持，理由是：损失主要是由卖房人诈骗行为造成，而非房管部门所为。 该案判决一出，引发了广泛的社会争议，请你站在法律人的立场，运用相关知识对此事背后反映的问题进行评论： 1．运用行政法基本理论分析该案中的政府行为。 2．该案原告应该采取何种手段维护自己的权益 3．联系该案谈谈建设法治政府的基本要求。 答题要求： 1．观点明确，论证充分，逻辑严谨，文字通顺； 2．不少于600字。
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
Questions 16 to 20 are based on the following talk.
Questions 16～20 Marjorie McMillan, head of radiology at a veterinary hospital, found out by reading a letter to the editor in her local newspaper. Pamela Goodwin, a labor-relations expert at General Motors, happened to see a computer printout. Stephanie Odle, an assistant manager at a Sam’s Club store, was slipped a co-worker’s tax form Purely by accident, these women learned they were making less than their male or, in Goodwin’s case, white colleagues at work. Each sued for pay discrimination under federal law, lucky enough to discover what typically stays a secret. "People don’t just stand around the watercooler to talk about how much they make," says McMillan. This, as they say, is the real world, one in which people would rather discuss their sex lives than salaries. And about a third of private employers actually prohibit employees from sharing pay information. It is also a world that the U. S. Supreme Court seems unfamiliar with. The Justices recently decided 5 to 4 that workers are out of luck if they file a complaint under Title Ⅶ—the main federal antidiscrimination law—more than 180 days after their salary is set. That’s six measly months to find out what your co-workers are making so that you can tell whether you’re getting chiseled because of your sex, race, religion or national origin. How many of the roughly 2,800 such complaints pending before the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission will fizzle because of this new rule is hard to say. Less of a mystery, though just as troubling, is how the court reached its decision. Lilly Ledbetter filed the case against Goodyear Tire ＆ Rubber Co. because at the end of a 19-year career, she was making far less than any of 15 men at her level She argued that Goodyear violated Title Ⅶ every time it gave her a smaller paycheck. Her complaint was timely, she said, because she filed it within 180 days of her last check. But the court majority read the statute to mean that only an actual decision to pay Ledbetter less could be illegal, and that happened well outside the 180-day period. A statute’s ambiguous wording is fair game, but why read it to frustrate Title Ⅶ’s purpose: to ease pay discrimination in a nation where women make only 77￠ on average for every $1 that men earn And while employers might like this decision, they could end up choking on the torrent of lawsuits that might now come their way. "The real message is that if you have any inkling that you are being paid differently, you need to file now, before the 180 days are up," says Michael Foreman of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights. All this sounds familiar. In June 1989, the Supreme Court issued three decisions that sharply limited the right to sue over employment discrimination. A day after the most prominent ruling, in Wards Cove v. Atonio, Senator Howard Metzenbaum (D., Ohio) declared that he would introduce a bill to overturn the decisions. It took civil rights advocates and their congressional allies eight months to introduce legislation. President George H. W. Bush vetoed the first version, arguing that it would encourage hiring quotas. Finally, in late 1991, the Democratic Congress and the Republican President reached a compromise fashioned by Senators John Danforth (R., Mo.) and Edward Kennedy (D., Mass.). It became the Civil Rights Act of 1991 and overturned parts of eight high-court decisions. Now, Foreman and others are working on a bill to overturn the Ledbetter case, and Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, among others, have expressed interest. A Democratic Congress may well cooperate, though with a Republican again in the White House, final legislation before next year’s elections isn’t guaranteed. In any event, we probably won’t see the kind of groundswell that shifted the law toward workers in 1991 because civil rights advocates aren’t sure these Justices are a threat to workers’ rights. Last June, for example, they made it harder for employers to retaliate against employees who complain of discrimination. That left the Ledbetter ruling looking particularly clueless. "I heard the decision and thought, what is wrong with this court" says McMillan. "It just doesn’t live in the real world. \ It can be implied from the passage that ______.
Questions 6 to 10 are based on the following news.
Questions 11～15 It has been a lousy few years for much of the media, and 2008 has offered no respite. But to quote the hideous’70s band Bachman Turner Overdrive, b-b-b-baby, you just ain’t see n-n-nothing yet. Because on top of the wrenching change affecting essentially every non-online media, here comes a very scary-looking economic downturn. Think of the recession, says Barclays analyst Anthony DiClemente, "as a vine growing up a wall. Except instead of a healthy vine, like at Wrigley [Field], it’s like—’feed me, Seymour’— from The Little Shop of Horrors. " Forgive the surfeit of pop-culture jokes. I’m only trying to inject levity into an extremely grim picture. According to ad tracker TNS Media Intelligence, which provided all such figures for this column, automotive and financial services were the No. 1 and No. 3 U. S. ad categories last year. We all know what happened to the latter in recent months. In 2007, Merrill Lynch, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, and Washington Mutual spent $ 213.1 million on advertising. Even if those companies’ new owners spend something to reassure old customers, you’re likely looking at a nine- figure sum sucked out of the ad marketplace by those guys alone. And when major carmakers report sales drops of 30%, boffo ad buys do not follow. Ford Motor’s ad spending was down over 31% for the first half of this year. Car sales’ slide has accelerated since. In case you’re wondering, the No.2 ad category was retail, which is now under severe pressure as consumers spend less. The consequences of all this contraction are readily apparent when you talk to key media executives. Magazines sell ads long before they appear, and advertisers already are making noises about cutting back in the first half of 2009, says one senior executive in that industry. "Everyone says they are going to keep advertising in a downturn," says another executive, who has run major sales organizations in different media. "But not everyone actually does it. That’s just the reality of having to report earnings and profits." And while the wealthiest consumer may remain relatively untouched, those who have recently traded up to high-end products may slam the brakes on such consumption, raising chances that luxury advertisers will be affected, too. Food looks more likely to stay stable. One mordant TV executive puts it this way. "The auto industry is out. And Campbell’s Soup is in. " How the dollars flow—or rather don’t flow—in any downturn can shape events in ways obscured until much later. As strange as it sounds today, the tech bust that started in 2000 meant that total dollars spent on online display advertising declined 21% between 2001 and 2002. And as strange as it sounds today, many established media organizations used that decline as a rationale for deemphasizing the Web in favor of their traditional businesses—and underinvestment allowed all manner of Web-only startups to outflank them in the one medium that’s still growing. While online display ads will still be up in ’09, says BMO Capital Markets analyst Leland Westerfield, that growth rate will likely slow. Look for search advertising to hold up, so Google should be hurt the least. Elsewhere, Barclay’s DiClemente suggests, the slowdown’s effects will move up a media ladder of sorts, starting with newspapers, magazines, radio, local TV, and then hitting broadcast and—possibly—cable TV. There’s a "high probability," he says, that the "advertising malaise spreads to network TV"—the one long-running medium that’s held steadiest as others have fallen off. DiClemente is forecasting a 5.5% pullback in ad spending next year, with only Web and cable TV posting ad upticks. It may be hard to conjure a scenario worse than today’s, given what radio, local TV, and newspapers are currently experiencing. This has been a year, in which many unthinkable things have happened—newspaper executives, for instance, mulling which days of the week they won’t publish. But the coming downturn means that what once was unthinkable ... well, you better start thinking it. TV executive says: "The auto industry is out. And Campbell’s Soup is in.", because ______.
微信支付 
支付宝支付