I don't understand the correct answer for this one at all. Can someone breakdown why all the wrong ones are correct and D is correct? Here is my breakdown:

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-65-section-3-passage-3-questions/

Answer A: This is what I picked both times, I don’t really see what’s wrong with it. Doesn’t legally requiring something describe US/Canadian law while not legally requiring it parallel Roman law? To me, this is perfect…

Answer B: Roman law didn’t make anything illegal, so this isn’t it.

Answer C: Roman law didn’t distinguish between legality, so this isn’t it.

Answer D: Completely dumbfounded how this could possibly be the answer. Roman law didn’t make blackmail illegal outright. You had to show harm, and THAT made it illegal. I don’t see how this is analogous to Roman law in the slightest…

Answer E: Higher fines? Roman law didn’t have harsher punishment.