130. In a 5-to-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled（裁定） that two upstate New York counties owed restitution to three tribes of Oneida Indians for the unlawful seizure of their ancestral lands in the eighteenth century.
(A) that two upstate New York counties owed restitution to three tribes of Oneida Indians for the unlawful seizure of
(B) that two upstate New York counties owed restitution to three tribes of Oneida Indians because of their unlawful seizure of
(C)two upstate New York counties to owe restitution to three tribes of Oneida Indians for their unlawful seizure of
(D) on two upstate New York counties that owed restitution to three tribes of Oneida Indians because they unlawfully seized
(E) on the restitution that two upstate New York counties owed to three tribes of Oneida Indians for the unlawful seizure of
Choice A, the best answer, uses that appropriately to introduce a clause that describes the Supreme Court's ruling; A also employs the idiomatic phrase restitution... for. In choice B, restitution... because of is not idiomatic. The plural pronouns their in B and C and they' in D are confusing as references to counties, especially since their refers to the Oneida in the phrase their ancestral lands. Choices C, D, and E each fail to use that to introduce the clause that explains the Court's ruling (用宾语从句就是为了说明判决结果); as a result, the phrasing in those choices is awkward, unidiomatic, and imprecise.
原文说counties因为unlawful seizure而restitution，如果按照这样的解释The plural pronouns their in B and C and they' in D are confusing as references to counties, especially since their refers to the Oneida in the phrase their ancestral lands，不变成Oneida要restitution
