PT159.S4.P3.Q15 > Analytics

Hide analysis

The following passage was adapted from an article published in 1998.

███ ██████████ ██ ██████ ███████ ███████████ ███ ███████ ██ █████████████ ███████ █████ ██ ███ ██████ █████████ ███ ████████ ███████ ███ █████████ █████████ ██ ███████████ ██ ███ █████ █████ ████████████ ██████████ ██████████ ██████ ███ ███████ ███████ ███ ████████ ██ █████ █████ ██ ████████ ████████ ██ █████████ ████ █████████████ █████ █ ███████ ███████████ ███ ████████████ ██ ███ ████ ███ ████ ██████ ██████ ████ █████ ███ █████████ ████████ ██ ███ ███████████ ███ ████ ██ ████ ███ ███████████ ████████ ██ █████████ ██ █████ ███████

Introduce topic · Mayan lawsuit seeking protection of Mayan rights

Belize allowed logging on lands occupied by Mayans.

███ █████████ ██ ███ ████ ██ ████ ███ ████████ ██████ ██ █████ ██ ████ ██████ ███ ███ █████████████ ████ ███

Basis of lawsuit · Common law and international law

Common law · Based on custom and precedent from analogous cases

██ █ ██████ ███████ ███████ ██████ ██ █ ██████████ █████████████ ███ ██████ ██ ██████ ████ ███ ███ █████ ██ ███████ ██████████ ██████████ ███████ ███ ████████ ████████ ██ ███ ████ █████████ ██████ █████████████ ██ ██████████ ████ █████ ██████████ ██████████████ ████████████ ██████████ ███████ ███ ███ ██████ ██████████████████ ██ █████ ██████ ████ ██████████ ██████████ ██████ █████ ██ ██████████ █████████ ██ ███ ██ ██████ ████ ████████ ██ ██████████ ████ ███ █████████ ████████ ██ ███ ██████ ██ ███████ █████ ██ ██ ████ ██ ██████████ ██ █████ ██████████ █████████ ██ ███ ███████ ██ ████████ █████████ ██ ████████ ████ ████

Reliance on other jurisdictions · Mayans’ argument relies on other jurisdictions, since courts in Belize haven’t ruled on indigenous rights

This approach is consistent with the custom of courts in Belize.

███ ██████ ███ ██ ██████████ ██████ ██ ████ ██████ ██ █████ ████ ███ ████████ ██ ███ █████ █████████ ███ ████ ███ ███ ████ ███ ██ ████████ ████ ███ █████████████ ████ ███ ████████ █ ████ ████████ ██ ███ ████ █████ ██ █████████ ███████████ ██████████ ██████ ██████ ████ ██████████████ ███ ██ █ ██████████ ███ █████████ █████████ ██ ███ ███████████ ██ ███ ██████ ████ ██████████ ████ █████████████ ███ ████████ ███ █████████ ██ █████████ █████ ████████ █████████████ ██ ███████████ ███ █████████ ██ ██████████ ██████████ ███████ ███ █████ █████ ███████████ ███████████ █████ ███ █████████████ ████████ ██ █████ ███ █████████ ███████ ███

International law · Indigenous rights are also based on norms of the world community

As an example, the high court of Australia recognized these rights as protected by the ICCPR.

██████ ██ ████ █ █████ ██ ███ █████████ ███ ████████ ██████ ██████ █████████ █████ ███ ████████ ██ ██████ ███ ████████ ██ ██████████ ██████ ██ ███████

Author’s opinion · Belize’s courts should also look to the ICCPR

██ █ ████████ ██████████████ ███████ ██████ ██ ████ ██ ███████ ███ ██████████ █████████████ ██ ███ ████████ ██ ██████████ ██████ █████████████ ██ █████ █████████████ ███ █████ █████████████ ██ █████████████ ██████ ██████████ ██ ███ ████████ ████████ █████████ ████████ █████████ ███ ███ ██ ███████ ██████████ ████████ ████ ███ ██████ ███ ██ ██████ █████ ████ ███ ████ ███████████ ███████ ██ ████ ██ █████ █████████████ ████ ████ ██████████ ██ █████ ██ ██████████ ██████ ██████ ███ █ ███████████ ██ █████ ██ ███████████ ██████████ ██████ ██ ███████

Author’s conclusion · There should be a presumption in favor of recognizing indigenous rights in Belize

Belize is free to decide differently from other jurisdictions regarding indigenous rights, but they shouldn’t.

Passage Style

Single position

15.

Which one of the following ████ ██████████ █████████ ███ ████ █████ ██ ███ ████████

Question Type

Main point

If the author advocates a view, then the main point should capture the author's view. Here, the author argues that courts in Belize should adopt a presumption that recognizes the existence of indigenous rights. The author makes this argument in connection with a description of the Mayans' lawsuit asserting indigenous rights. It's not clear that the author thinks the Mayans should win the lawsuit; but the author's argument suggests she thinks the lawsuit should at least be allowed to proceed, because it is asserting protection of rights that courts should recognize.

The concessions granted ██ ███ ██████████ ██ ██████ ███ ███████ ██ ████ █████████ ██ ███ ████ ███ ███████ ██ ████████ ███████████ █████ █████████ ███████████ ██ ███ █████████████ ██████████

This goes too far beyond the author's point. The author doesn't argue that the Mayans should win their lawsuit. She merely argues that Belize courts should recognize indigenous rights. This might suggest that the lawsuit should go forward, but that doesn't imply the author thinks the logging concessions are definitely a violation of indigenous rights.

Belize's common-law system, █████ ███ ████ ████ █████████████ ███ ██████████ ██ █████ ██████████████ ███████ █████ ██ █████ █████████████ ███ ██████ ██████████ ███████

The author never indicates that Belize's common-law system already permits lawsuits asserting indigenous rights. The author argues that the system should recognize indigenous rights, because common law and international law support such recognition. But that doesn't mean Belize's system currently permits these lawsuits.

14%

The failure by ██████ ██ █████████ ██████████ ██████ █████ ███████ ███ ████ ███████ ██ ███ ████ ██████████ ████████ ██████████ ██████ ██ █████ ██████████ ██████████████

The author never indicates that Belize has failed to recognize indigenous rights after hearing the lawsuit brought by Mayans. Courts in Belize haven't ruled yet on indigenous rights, but that doesn't mean that they decided not to recognize such rights upon hearing the lawsuit.

While Belize is ████ ██ ███████ ███ ██████ ███ █████████████ ██ ███ █████████████ ██████████ █ ███████ ██ █████████ ██████████ ██████ █████ ███ █ █████████████ ███████ █████████ █████ ███ ███ ██ ███████

The main point of the passage isn't to state what would be true if Belize courts don't recognize indigenous rights. The author argues that precedent supports recognition of indigenous rights. That's a view about how Belize courts should recognize such rights and about the viability of the Mayans' lawsuit. But it's not a view about how a bad decision in the Mayan case might set unsound precedent. In addition, it's not clear that the author believes failure to recognize indigenous rights would be unsound. Although the author believes there should be a presumption in favor of those rights, this isn't the same as saying those rights should definitely be found to exist.

26%

The suit brought ██ ███ ████ █████████ ██████████ ██████ ███ █████ ██ ████ ██ ██ █████████████ ██ ██████████ ██ █████ ███████ █████ █████ ███████ ██████ ████ ███ █████████ ██ ███████ ██████ ████

This captures the main point the best out of the five available answers. The author argues that courts in Belize should adopt the presumption that recognizes the existence of indigenous rights. The author makes this argument in connection with a discussion of the Mayans' lawsuit, implying that there is at least some merit to the Mayans' position.

51%

Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.

It takes about five minutes.

Take the free diagnostic

More free LSAT prep: Sample LSAT questions Full-length diagnostic & practice test All free LSAT resources

PrepTest 159 - Section 4 - Passage 3 - Question 15

Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action

PrepTest 159 - Section 4 - Passage 3 - Question 15

Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Want to know why the right answer is right?