Most of what has been written about Thurgood Marshall, a former United States Supreme Court justice who served from 1967 to 1991, has just focused on his judicial record and on the ideological content of his earlier achievements as a lawyer pursuing civil rights issues in the courts. ███
Intro topic ·Thurgood Marshall, lawyer and Supreme Court judge
Revisit main point ·Marshall's public interest approach has been widely adopted
Passage Style
Single position
Spotlight
4.
It can be most reasonably ████████ ████ ███ ███████ ████ ███ ██████ █████ ███ ████ ████ ████████ █████████ ██ ████████ ██
Question Type
Author’s perspective
Implied
What would the author say about the test case strategy? She thinks it was successful and influential. At a minimum, we know the author has a positive attitude toward the strategy.
a
arbitrary
The author never suggests the strategy was random or involved an unreasonable process.
b
inflexible
The author never suggests the strategy wasn’t adaptable.
c
unprecedented
Supported, because the strategy was an “innovation that changed public interest law.” That’s evidence the author thinks the strategy was not used before.
d
necessary
The author never suggests that the test case strategy was necessary in order for Marshall to achieve his success. Although it did contribute to his success, that doesn’t imply it was required. Also, if you’re looking at the word “essential” in P2, that word isn’t used to describe the test case strategy. It’s used to describe a component of the test case strategy — that component is necessary to the test case strategy, but we don’t know whether the strategy itself is necessary for something else.
e
subjective
The author never suggests that the test case strategy was based on personal tastes or feelings or other kinds of subjective criteria. We have no evidence from the passage that Marshall’s criteria for selecting cases were subjective. And no, the mere fact that Marshall evaluated precedential nuances, potential impacts of decisions, and the level of public sympathy/appeal/credibility of plaintiffs does not show that Marshall’s selection of cases was subjective. One can use objective criteria to evaluate all of these things. The passage does not tell us enough about the way in which Marshall chose cases to support the characterization that his decision process was subjective.
Difficulty
77% of people who answer get this correct
This is a moderately difficult question.
It is slightly harder than the average question in this passage.
CURVE
Score of students with a 50% chance of getting this right
25%124
142
75%160
Analysis
Author’s perspective
Implied
Law
Single position
Spotlight
Answer Popularity
PopularityAvg. score
a
1%
154
b
1%
160
c
77%
163
d
15%
160
e
6%
161
Question history
You don't have any history with this question.. yet!
You've discovered a premium feature!
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Subscribers can learn all the LSAT secrets.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.