1. Who does the organization of Law Society represent?
| A．Native people. | B．Lawyers in Britain. |
| C．Non-humans. | D．Children in Wales. |
| A．They focus on better ways to tackle climate change. |
| B．They forbid other creatures to use trees for food or shelter. |
| C．They recognize the legal rights of the whole natural system. |
| D．They protect things humans find interesting like trees and pets. |
| A．Defending native cultures by law. |
| B．Using laws to protect nature. |
| C．Fighting the loss of biodiversity. |
| D．Using technology to protect the environment. |
2 . Utah’s governor, Spencer Cox, recently signed two bills into law that strictly limit children’s use of social media platforms. Under the law, which takes effect next year, social media companies have to check the ages of all users in the state, and children under age 18 have to get agreement from their parents to have accounts. Parents will also be able to use their kids’ accounts, apps won’t be allowed to show children ads, and accounts for kids won’t be able to be used between 10:30 pm and 6:30 am without parental agreement.
While some people argue age limitation allows tech companies to collect even more data about users, let’s be real: These companies already have much private information about us. To solve this problem, we need a separate data privacy law. But until that happens, this concern shouldn’t stop us from protecting kids.
One of the key parts of the law is allowing parents to use their kids’ accounts. By doing this, the law begins to help address one of the biggest dangers kids face online: harmful content.
One huge challenge the law helps parents get over is the amount of time kids are spending on social media. A 2022 survey found that, on average, children aged 8 to 12 spend 5 hours and 33 minutes per day on social media while those aged 13 to 18 spend 8 hours and 39 minutes daily. It’s warned that lack of sleep is connected with serious harm to children — everything from injuries to depression (抑郁), fatness and diabetes. So, parents need to have a way to ensure their kids aren’t up on social media platforms all night.
Considering the experiences many kids are having on social media, this law will help Utah’s parents protect their kids. Parents in other states need the same support. Now, it’s time for the government to step up and ensure children throughout the country have the same protection as Utah’s kids.
1. Which is allowed according to the new bill?| A．Ads can be put on to children. |
| B．Children can use social media freely. |
| C．Parents can check their kids’ accounts. |
| D．Related companies protect users’ accounts. |
| A．Because children’s right to surf the Internet is limited. |
| B．Because more personal information may be given away. |
| C．Because it prevents the data privacy law from taking effect. |
| D．Because children may become too dependent on the Internet. |
| A．Higher learning efficiency. |
| B．Better personal eating habits. |
| C．Easier access to healthy media. |
| D．Improved physical and mental health. |
| A．Supportive. | B．Doubtful. | C．Flexible. | D．Negative. |
3 . Beijing No 4 Intermediate People’s Court said on Thursday that it concluded 77 cases of smuggling (走私) precious animal products from the beginning of 2015 to June this year, with about 40 percent of defendants (被告) given prison terms of three or more years. The products were found to be frequently made of body parts of some endangered wild animals such as elephants, turtles, bears and wolves, Wang Jing, vice-president of the court, told a news conference.
”Most of the defendants were migrant workers, students and tourists coming back to China,“ Wang said. ”Some aimed to sell the products for profits or send to friends and family members as gifts, while they wanted to use them to help with diseases.“
Wang explained that some of the defendants received heavier penalties (刑罚), such as a long-term imprisonment and a high fine, because the animal parts they smuggled were from animals listed on the national key protection of wildlife or related to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora(CITES). For example, a defendant surnamed Yan was sentenced to 10 years in prison, along with 200,000 yuan($27,968)in fines, for smuggling 393 fish bladder products, the court said. Yan was caught while arriving at the Beijing Capital International Airport from Mexico on March 21, 2018, and the suspected products were discovered by the customs staff members in Yan’s luggage, it said. The products were later identified as being made of drum fish in Gulf of California, and the fish is listed on the CITES, it said, adding that the products were worth of about 2.51 million yuan($351,000).
To effectively fight the crime, the court has issued a guideline on the smuggling of precious animal products to help judges accurately apply laws and unify (统一) the standards of relevant case hearings.
On Thursday, the court also disclosed four other smuggling cases, showing its determination and effort to protect precious animals by rule of law.
1. What did Wang Jing tell the news conference in paragraph 1?| A．Who the products would be sold to. | B．Where the wild animals came from. |
| C．What the products were made of. | D．How the wild animals were caught. |
| A．Five years. | B．Seven years. | C．Ten years. | D．Twelve years. |
| A．Have some doubt about. | B．Feel a little upset about. |
| C．Try to discover facts about. | D．Give people information about. |
| A．Beijing court handles 77 cases of smuggling animal products |
| B．Beijing court makes an effort to recognize wild animals products |
| C．Beijing court helps judges apply laws about smuggling animal products |
| D．Beijing court issues guideline on smuggling of precious animal products |
4 . Learning to drive is important to the independence of teenagers, but it is also a great responsibility. Although having a law that keeps 16-year-old drivers from having more than one teenager in the car with them at first seems unfair, there are convincing reasons for this requirement.
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety reports that teens are four times more likely than older drivers to be involved in an automobile accident. It also reports that 16-and-17-year-old drivers are twice as likely to have an accident if they have two teenage friends in the car and four times as likely to have one if they have three or more teenage friends in the car with them. Fatal (致命的) crashes of 16-year-old drivers involve the highest percentage of speeding, driver error, and number of passengers. This information is enough to cause any reasonable person to wonder about the wisdom of allowing new teen drivers to take a carload of friends anywhere, even if the law permits it.
A study at the National Institutes of Health indicates that the part of the human brain that controls judgment and evaluates the consequences of our actions might not be fully formed until the age of 25. Until this study, researchers had placed the age at 18. If this is true, it could explain the reckless (鲁莽的) behavior of many teens, behavior that often extends into their twenties. It also could be a strong reason for being cautious about the driving circumstances of young people.
This is not the only study that indicates such caution is necessary. One study at Temple University in Philadelphia examines the results of peer pressure in risky driving situations. The study, which uses a driving game, has an individual guide a car through a course, both alone and in the presence of friends. Three different age groups participated in the study: 13-16, 18-22, and 24 and older. Members of the oldest group showed caution whether driving alone or with friends present, but the two younger groups took more chances when they were with their friends. Furthermore, because these drivers were accustomed to the noise and distraction of many passengers, they were unable to see their own mistakes. Once again, this is a good indication that a law restricting the number of teenagers in the car with a young driver is a good idea.
1. What does the author mainly tell us in Paragraph 2?| A．Many deaths have occurred because of inexperience and overconfidence. |
| B．It’s reasonable to severely limit the passenger number of teen drivers. |
| C．New teen drivers have to ask permission before driving with friends. |
| D．There are many causes behind the teens’ driving accidents. |
| A．different age groups have different peer pressure |
| B．teenagers often give wrong judgments above passengers’ noise |
| C．underdeveloped brain makes teens ignore their mistakes |
| D．driving circumstances are bound up with the risk of accidents |
| A．protect teens on the highway | B．raise teens’ sense of responsibility |
| C．reduce the number of fatal crashes | D．force teens to drive with caution |
| A．Some teenagers have risky behavior while driving. |
| B．Certain laws treat teenagers and adults differently. |
| C．We still need more studies on teen driving. |
| D．Driving is important to a teenager’s sense of independence. |
5 . People who cross the street while looking at their phones may be fined in the city of Xiamen, Fujian province, as traffic police officers are enforcing (施行) a local regulation that was put into effect on August 1st.
A pedestrian who was crossing the street on Tuesday while looking at their phone was given a warning, becoming the city’s first to receive a reprimand (训斥) for the behavior.
The Traffic Safety Regulation on Zebra Lines in Xiamen Special Economic Zone, made into a law on Tuesday, states pedestrians should not browse their electronic devices or engage in other activities that may end anger traffic safety while using crossing lanes. Those who violate this rule and delay or stop the progress of the normal passage of vehicles are supposed to be given a warning or a fine of 50 yuan($7).
The regulation was made in response to motions by legislators (立法委员) to the Xiamen people’s congress. “Through putting uncivilized behavior right via legal means, we hope to create a better environment for drivers and pedestrians to better understand and interact with each other,” said Wu Tao, an official at the local congress.
Su Guoqiang, a deputy to the congress among those who raised the motion, said more than 20 percent of traffic accidents in Xiamen happened on crosswalks. “We hope to use the punishment of the ‘small’ act of browsing phones as something to prevent people from doing such a thing,” he told China Central Television.
Peng Chong, a traffic police officer in Xiamen, told CCTV for the time being they will mostly educate and warn violators and make everyone involved in traffic aware of the rules.
1. What does the underlined word “motions” in paragraph 4 mean?| A．Formal invitations. | B．Formal features. |
| C．Formal proposals. | D．Formal apologies. |
| A．The concrete contents of the punishment. |
| B．The reason why the motion was put forward. |
| C．The reason why people browse phones on crosswalks. |
| D．The factors that have an influence on traffic on streets. |
| A．Mostly by giving them a ticket. | B．Mostly by giving them a warning. |
| C．Mostly by making them recite the law. | D．Mostly by making them catch another violator. |
| A．Pedestrians on crosswalk warned not to end anger traffic safety in Xiamen |
| B．Xiamen expects drivers and pedestrians to better understand each other |
| C．20 percent of traffic accidents in Xiamen happen on crosswalks |
| D．Xiamen regulation on crosswalk behavior enters force |
After 1028 days of detention (拘押)，Meng Wanzhou, the CFO (首席财务官) of Huawei Technology Company, finally returned to China.
On Dec 1, 2018, Meng was detained by the Canadian police at the request of the US, accused of violating US sanctions (制裁) against Iran.
According to a statement issued by one of the lawyers
The news of Meng’s release has aroused a strong reaction among Chinese internet
“As an ordinary Chinese citizen who
7 . Dogs are welcome in the outdoor areas of restaurants in New York, US. In the past, health and safety laws made it illegal (违法的) to bring dogs to any restaurant in New York. But last May state lawmakers voted (表决) to let people bring dogs to restaurants that have tables outdoors: Not one lawmaker voted no. The law was soon passed. Several special rules are included in this law. The dogs must be kept on a leash (皮带). Dogs must not share water bowls. Also, restaurants can choose to let people bring dogs or not.
New York joins California, Florida and Maryland in the list of states with similar laws. In many European countries, bringing dogs to restaurants is common. Paris in France has allowed dogs to go with their owners in restaurants for a long time.
Governor Andrew Cuomo believes that this new law will help businesses grow. But not all New Yorkers are happy about this new law. Christopher Miller is the spokesman for the New York City Department of Health. He told the New York Daily News that letting dogs in restaurants could cause problems. “The Health Department loves all dogs, but just not at restaurants where they can create a risk to the health and safety of diners, restaurant workers and other dogs,” Miller said.
New York City is often the center of the new ideas in the US. A law asking some restaurants in the city to show the amount of calories (卡路里数量) in the food they served was passed in 2009. The city leader tried unsuccessfully to stop the sale of large amounts of soft drinks in 2012. Smoking was made illegal in restaurants in 1993.
1. What can we know about the new law from Paragraph 1?| A．Who made it. | B．Why it was made. |
| C．Why there are special rules. | D．What the special rules are. |
| A．Two. | B．Three. | C．Four. | D．Five. |
| A．It could help businesses grow. | B．It could be bad for the environment. |
| C．It could bring health and safety problems. | D．It could make people pay more attention to dogs. |
| A．Smoking. | B．Bringing dogs. |
| C．Supplying high-calorie food. | D．Selling soft drinks in big cups. |
8 . Yang Le Ge Yang, a game on WeChat’s mini program platform, has spread widely on Chinese social media, with a related topic lopping the trending charts (排行榜) on Weibo.
The game is characterized by comic-like art design and background music and its brief introduction that less than 0.1% of players can complete all the levels.
In order to pass the level efficiently, a huge crowd, especially the teenagers, focus their energy and pocket money on seeking the strategy, with little knowledge of the potential risk of being cheated.
Hanging over the situation, China’s top legislature (立法机关) took an effective measure against telecom and online fraud (诈骗) on September 2 by adopting widely expected law that will smooth out these crimes (犯罪) which have long disturbed the public and led to people’s financial losses after receiving spam messages (垃圾短信) and calls.
The law on telecom and online fraud, which has 50 articles, was passed after being reviewed three times by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress. China’s top legislative body, aiming to offer strong protection of people’s rights and punish cheaters.
As some people, particularly teenagers, were defrauded by being tricked into buying online game equipment, the Cyberspace Administration of China has worked with the Ministry of Public Security in the fight against cheaters since the beginning of this year. So far, they have dealt with more than 12,000 such cases and asked internet operators to improve the public’s channels to provide fraud-related information.
1. Why does the passage begin with a popular game?| A．To share a hot game. | B．To entertain the readers. |
| C．To introduce the topic. | D．To attract readers’ attention. |
| A．Telecom and online fraud is a new crime. |
| B．Teens focus on the game as a result of feeling secure and protected. |
| C．China’s legislation will take action to fight against the online fraud. |
| D．Some individuals fail to recognize the truth of spam messages and calls. |
| A．It was officially reviewed 50 times. |
| B．It didn’t reach the public’s expectation. |
| C．It hardly contributed to guarding against online fraud. |
| D．It was passed to protect people’s rights and punish cheaters. |
| A．The ways to rise to frauds. |
| B．The details of various frauds. |
| C．The frauds that teenagers were tricked into. |
| D．The channels to provide fraud-related information. |
9 . The Yurok people have lived along the Klamath River, which flows from the Cascades in Oregon southwest through Northern California, for thousands of years, protecting the region and river from which they — and others — draw sustenance (生计).
But as development and pollution continue to reduce the number of fish in the river and the quantity and quality of its waters, the Yurok Tribe is legalizing (合法化) the tribe’s longstanding care by granting the Rights of Personhood to the Klamath, the first river in North America to have such rights declared.
The Yurok Tribal Council’s May 2019 resolution means the river has the same legal rights as a human under tribal law. This order allows people to bring law cases on behalf of the river when its rights are violated. According to the resolution, the tribe’s intention is to provide a legal basis for safeguarding the river and its ecosystem, especially in the face of water diversion, industrial pollution, and climate change impacts, among other threats. In a testimony (证词) delivered to the U. S. House of Representatives in October 2019, Yurok Tribe Vice Chairman Frankie Myers said this legal framework could create a path to ward a more thoughtful view of the rights of nature in other communities and courts, and that any money awarded by the Yurok courts will fund cleanup and restoration projects to remedy the litigated harms.
The Yurok Tribe’s resolution draws lessons from the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and echoes the efforts of other Indigenous tribes, including the White Earth Band of Ojibwe, which adopted the Rights of wild rice, in December 2018. “This is a very important step forward in the Rights of Nature movement,” Mari Margil, Associate Director of the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund commented.
1. Which of the following can be used to describe Yurok people?| A．A conqueror. | B．A guardian. | C．A governor. | D．A consumer. |
| A．The process of legalization. | B．The tradition of Yurok tribe. |
| C．The reason behind the legalization. | D．The importance of the Klamath River. |
| A．Win an award in cleanup projects. |
| B．Protect the personhood of the river. |
| C．Fight against global water pollution. |
| D．Improve the government legal system. |
| A．Time and tide wait for no man. |
| B．Birds of a feather flock together. |
| C．Past experience is a guide for the future. |
| D．All things are difficult before they are easy. |
10 . “There is one and only one social responsibility of business,” wrote Milton Friedman, a Nobel Prize-winning economist, “that is, to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits.” But even if you accept Friedman’s statement and regard corporate social responsibility (CSR) policies as a waste of shareholders’ money, things may not be absolutely clear-cut. New research suggests that CSR may create monetary value for companies at least when they are charged with corruption (腐败).
The largest firms in America and Britain together spend more than $15 billion a year on CSR, according to an estimate by EPG, a consulting firm. This could add value to their businesses in three ways. First, consumers may take CSR spending as a “signal” that a company’s products are of high quality. Second, customers may be willing to buy a company’s products as an indirect way to donate to the good causes it helps. And third, through a more diffuse (分散的) “halo effect” its good deeds earn it greater consideration from consumers and others.
Previous studies on CSR have had trouble distinguishing these effects because consumers can be affected by all three. A recent study attempts to separate them by looking at bribery prosecutions (起诉) under American’s Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). It argues that since prosecutors do not consume a company’s products as part of their investigations, they could be influenced only by the halo effect.
The study finds that, among prosecuted firms, those with the most comprehensive CSR programmes tend to get more lenient punishments. Their analysis rules out the possibility that it is the firm’s political influence, rather than its CSR stance, that accounts for the leniency: Companies that contribute more to political campaigns do not receive lower fines.
In all, the study concludes that whereas prosecutors should only evaluate a case based on its merits, they do seem to be influenced by a company’s record in CSR. “We estimate that either eliminating a substantial labor-rights concern, such as child labor, or increasing corporate giving by about 20% result in fines that generally are 40% lower than the typical punishment for bribing foreign officials.” says one researcher.
Researchers admit that their study does not answer the question at how much businesses ought to spend on CSR. Nor does it reveal how much companies are relying on the halo effect, rather than the other possible benefits, when companies get into trouble with the law, evidence of good character can win them a less costly punishment.
1. The author views Milton Friedman’s statement about CSR with___________.| A．uncertainty | B．interest | C．approval | D．tolerance |
| A．guarding it against malpractices | B．protecting it from consumers |
| C．winning trust from consumers | D．raising the quality of its products |
| A．less debatable | B．more lasting | C．more effective | D．less severe |
| A．comes across as reliable evidence | B．has an impact on their decision |
| C．is considered part of the investigation | D．increases the chance of being punished |
