LSAT 115 – Section 4 – Question 02

LSAT 115 - Section 4 - Question 02

December 2002

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:37

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT115 S4 Q02
+LR
Point at issue: disagree +Disagr
Conditional Reasoning +CondR
Value Judgment +ValJudg
Fact v. Belief v. Knowledge +FvBvK
A
80%
163
B
9%
157
C
7%
159
D
3%
154
E
1%
153
127
142
157
 +Medium 146.173 +SubsectionMedium

Tom: Critics of recent high court decisions claim that judges’ willingness to abide by earlier decisions is necessary to avoid legal chaos. Since high courts of the past often repudiated legal precedents and no harm to the legal system ensued, these critics’ objections must be politically motivated and ought to be ignored.

Mary: High courts have repudiated precedents in the past, but they were careful to do so only when the previous rulings were old and had clearly become outdated. The recently overturned rulings were themselves recent. Overturning any recent legal ruling diminishes the law, which comes to be viewed as unstable and capricious.

Speaker 1 Summary
Recently, the high court has overturned earlier decisions. There’s been criticism of the court on the grounds that judges’ willingness to follow precedent is necessary to avoid legal chaos. Tom rejects this criticism, because judges have often overturned legal precedent in the past without causing harm.

Speaker 2 Summary
Mary agrees that judges have overturned precedent in the past, but says that this was only when the previous rulings were old and outdated. The high court’s recent decisions overturned more recent decisions, which makes people view the law as unstable. Her implicit point is that the criticism of the court’s recent decisions is valid.

Objective
We’re looking for a point of disagreement. The speakers disagree about whether the criticism of the high court’s recent decisions is valid. Tom thinks it isn’t, but Mary thinks it is.

A
whether the overturning of recent high court precedents will harm the legal system
This is a point of disagreement. Tom thinks the high court’s recent decisions overturning precedents won’t lead to harm. We know this because he thinks we should ignore the criticism of those decisions. Mary thinks the decisions diminish the law, or in other words, cause harm.
B
whether the overturning of recent high court precedents was politically motivated
Neither speaker comments on whether the high court’s decisions were politically motivated. Tom refers to the political motivations of critics of the decisions. But he doesn’t say anything about the motivations of the court.
C
whether critics of recent high court decisions in fact advanced the claim Tom cites
Mary doesn’t express an opinion about this. She doesn’t comment on criticism of recent high court rulings and whether Tom’s characterization of that criticism is accurate.
D
whether a precedent that is clearly outdated is in need of being overturned
Neither expresses an opinion about this. Tom doesn’t say anything about outdated precedents or the need to overturn them. Mary thinks overturning outdated precedents is acceptable, but doesn’t say whether we need to overturn them.
E
whether judicial decisions that seem progressive at first can quickly become outdated
Neither expresses an opinion about this. Tom doesn’t say anything about outdated precedents or progressive decisions. Mary doesn’t say anything about progressive decisions or how quickly they can be outdated.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 115 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Reading Comprehension

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply