Reading ComprehensionDifficulty: Easy

PT106 S4 P1 Q5 Explanation

Native American Land Claims

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

TopicsPrimary PurposeLaw

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • Save & drill this skill build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Passage

Some Native American tribes have had difficulty establishing their land claims because the United States government did not recognize their status as tribes; therefore during the 1970's some Native Americans attempted to obtain such recognition through the medium of U.S. courts. In presenting these suits, Native Americans had to operate within a perceptions and definitions that can exist between cultures whose systems of discourse are sometimes at variance.

In one instance, the entire legal dispute turned on whether the suing community—a group of Mashpee Wampanoag in the town of Mashpee, Massachusetts—constituted a tribe. The area had long been occupied by the Mashpee, who continued to have control over land use after the town's incorporation. But in the 1960's after an ruling: a body of Native Americans "governing themselves under one leadership and inhabiting a particular territory."

The town claimed that the Mashpee were not self-governing and that they had no defined territory: the Mashpee could legally be self-governing, the town argued, only if they could show written documentation of such a system, and could legally inhabit territory only if they had precisely delineated its boundaries and possessed a discourse between cultures can sometimes stand in the way of guaranteeing the fairness of legal decisions.

What this question is testing

Primary Purpose

Your task

Pin down exactly what the question asks about the passage — a detail, the author's view, the structure, or the main point — before looking at the choices.

Common trap

Answers that restate a true detail from the passage but don't answer the specific question being asked.

Winning move

Anticipate the answer in your own words from the passage, then find the choice that matches that prediction.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
5.

The passage is primarily concerned

Answer choices

  1. Out of Scope: evaluating multiple solutions1% picked this

    evaluating various approaches to solving a

    This is attractive, if we used a Problem / Solution framework. However the author never presented multiple solutions. The only solution we had was "try to obtain tribal recognition through the US courts". And the author was mainly neutral. The verb "evaluating" means that our author offered positive or negative opinions about several different solutions to a problem.

  2. Correct90% picked this

    illuminating a general problem by discussing a

    Why this is right

    You dirty dog, (B). Did you just blend together our two Frameworks? This answer has a nod to Problem/Solution and Theme/Example. The final sentence of the 1st paragraph is what we would consider the thesis / most valuable sentence, and it's saying "This process brought to light", which is the same as "illuminates" (literally! they're both about light!) The problem is what happens when two cultures try to interact, but their systems of discourse are at variance, so they have different perceptions / definitions of certain concepts (such as "tribe" or "self-governing").

    Skill tested: Primary Purpose · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

  3. Out of Scope: reconciling6% picked this

    reconciling the differences in how two opposing sides approach

    This makes it sound like the author had a more active role, rather than just descriptively telling us a story. This answer feels more like a Present Debate sort of purpose: to trace out two sides and then offer their own synthesis at the end. We could say that the US govt and the Mashpee/other Native American people were two opposing sides. By the author never reconciles their differences. She tells the story of a specific group of Mashpee trying to establish in the court system that they are a tribe, and highlights differences between how the Mashpee saw certain things and how the US govt did. But highlighting is not reconciling (which is more like offering your own take about how both sides could be correct). And there weren't two approaches to a problem. The problem for tribes is that the govt didn't recognize their tribal status. The tribes are trying to solve that problem, but the US govt doesn't have its own approach to solving that "problem". The US govt doesn't think the Mashpee are a tribe.

  4. Too Opinionated: critiquing2% picked this

    critiquing an earlier solution to a problem in light of

    This was a mainly neutral author, so verbs like "evaluating / reconciling / critiquing" should sound too opinionated. There isn't an Old vs. New solution. The same solution (trying to establish tribal status via the courts) goes from not working to working.

  5. Too Opinionated2% picked this

    reinterpreting an earlier analysis and proposing a new solution to

    Too Opinionated: reinterpreting / proposing Out of Scope: new solution This was a mainly neutral author, so both of these verbs are way too active and personal. The US court system seems to reinterpret an earlier analysis (Mashpee are not a tribe) at the very end of the passage. But nobody proposes a new solution to the problem. The solution to the problem of not being recognized as a tribe is to fight for that status in the courts. There isn't any alternative solution discussed.

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free