主页
学科
搜索
账户
常见问题
当前学科：水工建筑物
题目：
判断题
倒虹吸管水力计算的任务是：根据渠道水力要素和上游渠底高程，选定合理的管径，确定下游渠底高程和进出口的水面衔接形式。（）
A . 正确
B . 错误
答案：
<查看本题扣1积分>
查看答案
答案不对？请尝试站内搜索
推荐知识点:
客户车内有空的纸巾盒或空的水瓶我们可以为其丢掉吗？
可引起血磷降低的病因是()
在测量位置的确定时，对变电站而言，测量点应选在最高电压等级配电装置区外侧，避开进出线，不少于三点。
对慢性非传染性疾病的防治，最根本的措施是（）。
平面尺寸的分类包括：（）。
按文字排列方向分类，版面可以分为（）。
离心泵轴向力有什么危害？
阿斯巴甜是一种较为安全的甜味剂，其甜度高、味感接近于蔗糖，但不能用于下列哪类人群（）
何谓板块构造学说？其基本原理是什么？
根据以下资料，回答题。On a five to three vote, the Supreme Court knocked out much of Arizona’s immigration law Monday-a modest policy victory for the Obama Administration.But on the more important matter of the Constitution,the decision was an 8-0 defeat for the Administration’s effort to upset the balance of power between the federal government and the states.In Arizona v.United States, the majority overturned three of the four contested provisions of Arizona’s controversial plan to have state and local police enforce federal immigration law.The Constitutional principles that Washington alone has the power to “establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization ”and that federal laws precede state laws are noncontroversial .Arizona had attempted to fashion state policies that ran parallel to the existing federal ones.Justice Anthony Kennedy, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and the Court’s liberals, ruled that the state flew too close to the federal sun.On the overturned provisions the majority held the congress had deliberately “occupied the field” and Arizona had thus intruded on the federal’s privileged powers.However,the Justices said that Arizona police would be allowed to verify the legal status of people who come in contact with law enforcement.That’s because Congress has always envisioned joint federal-state immigration enforcement and explicitly encourages state officers to share information and cooperate with federal colleagues.Two of the three objecting Justice-Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas-agreed with this Constitutional logic but disagreed about which Arizona rules conflicted with the federal statute.The only major objection came from Justice Antonin Scalia,who offered an even more robust defense of state privileges going back to the alien and Sedition Acts.The 8-0 objection to President Obama turns on what Justice Samuel Alito describes in his objection as “a shocking assertion assertion of federal executive power”.The White House argued that Arizona’s laws conflicted with its enforcement priorities,even if state laws complied with federal statutes to the letter.In effect, the White House claimed that it could invalidate any otherwise legitimate state law that it disagrees with . Some powers do belong exclusively to the federal government, and control of citizenship and the borders is among them.But if Congress wanted to prevent states from using their own resources to check immigration status, it could.It never did so.The administration was in essence asserting that because it didn’t want to carry out Congress’s immigration wishes, no state should be allowed to do so either. Every Justice rightly rejected this remarkable claim. Three provisions of Arizona’s plan were overturned because they