Reading ComprehensionDifficulty: Hard

PT116 S4 P1 Q2 Explanation

Defense Lawyers

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

TopicsAuthor's AttitudeLaw

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

Start practicing free

Free to start

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

Is it necessary for defense lawyers to believe that the clients they defend are innocent of the charges against them? Some legal scholars hold that lawyers’ sole obligation is to provide the best defense they are capable of, claiming that in democratic societies all people accused of crimes are entitled to the defendants would say if they possessed the proper training or resources with which to represent themselves.

But such a position overlooks the fact that the defense lawyer’s obligation is twofold: to the defendant, certainly, but no less so to the court and, by extension, to society. For this reason, lawyers, great as their obligation to defendants is, should not, as officers of the court, present to the court well be innocent, the lawyer should of course try to prove that the client is innocent.

The lawyer’s obligation to the court and to society also ultimately benefits the defendant, because the “best defense” can only truly be provided by an advocate who, after a careful analysis of the facts, is convinced of the merits of the case. The fact that every client is entitled to a defense instead advocates for the rights of the defendant given the facts of the case.

What this question is testing

Author's Attitude

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
2.

Which one of the following most accurately describes the author’s attitude toward the twofold obligation introduced in

Answer choices

  1. Wrong Balance57% picked this

    confident that it enables defense lawyers to balance their competing responsibilities to the court

    This is a sneaky, tempting trap answer. We might think it's weird to say that the "twofold obligation enables defense lawyers to balance their competing responsibilities", because the twofold obligation is their competing responsibilites. Also, the two "folds" of that twofold obligation are 1. Defendant 2. Court (and by extension, societ) This answer is acting like the two prongs are 1. Court 2. Society Finally, the first sentence of the final paragraph makes it seem like these are not competing responsibilities at all: "the lawyer's obligation to court/society ultimately benefits the defendant". That doesn't sound like a zero sum tradeoff. It sounds like connected responsibilities but not necessarily competing ones.

  2. Too Strong: certain12% picked this

    certain that it prevents defense lawyers from representing clients whom they know

    The author never gives any indication that she holds the extreme idea that this twofold obligation is 100% successful at preventing defense lawyers from representing guilty clients. She's not even opposed to representing clients known to be guilty. The twofold obligation doesn't forbid that. It just says, "If you know they're guilty, don't try to argue for innocence or lie on the client's behalf."

  3. Unsupported Relationship5% picked this

    satisfied that it helps defense lawyers to uncover the relevant facts

    There's no way to connect balancing responsibilities to defendant and court/society with "doing a better job at uncovering the facts of the case".

  4. Out of Scope: common defense strategies1% picked this

    pleased that it does not interfere with common defense strategies used

    The author never labels any defense strategy "a common one", nor does she connect the twofold obligation to a common strategy. She believes that the twofold obligation should interfere with the defense strategy of arguing that a client who is known to be guilty is actually innocent.

  5. Correct26% picked this

    convinced that it does not represent a conflict of interest for

    Why this is right

    This is tricky to find the support for, since it's far away from where the twofold obligation is first brought up, but the first sentence of the final paragraph makes it seem like these two obligations are not a conflict of interest: "the lawyer's obligation to court/society ultimately benefits the defendant".

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

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

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

Save and practice this skill
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