Reading ComprehensionDifficulty: Hard

PT125 S3 P1 Q4 Explanation

Thurgood Marshall

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

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

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. But when Marshall’s career the opportunity arose, set up a predetermined legal campaign that was meticulously crafted and carefully coordinated.

One aspect of this campaign, the test case strategy, involved sponsoring litigation of tactically chosen cases at the trial court level with careful evaluation of the precedential nuances and potential impact of each decision. This allowed Marshall to try out different approaches and discover which was the best to be used. An cases with sympathetic litigants, whose public appeal, credibility, and commitment to the NAACP’s goals were unsurpassed.

In addition, Marshall used sociological and psychological statistics—presented in expert testimony, for example, about the psychological impact of enforced segregation—as a means of transforming constitutional law by persuading the courts that certain discriminatory laws produced public harms in violation of constitutional principles. This tactic, while often effective, has been criticized by some in their justifications for decisions where the purely legal principles appear inconclusive.

Since the time of Marshall’s work with the NAACP, the number of public interest law firms in the U.S. has grown substantially, and they have widely adopted his combination of strategies for litigation, devoting them to various public purposes. These strategies have been used, for example, in consumer advocacy campaigns and, more be a radical departure from accepted conventions—have become the norm for U.S. public interest litigation today.

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
4.

It can be most reasonably inferred from the passage that the author views the test case strategy developed

Answer choices

  1. Contradicted1% picked this

    This Highlight Noteworthy passage is singing the praises of the strategy, calling it carefully coordinated. That's the opposite of arbitrary, which means random or not based on a logical system.

  2. Unsupported1% picked this

    There's nothing in this passage to support the idea that the test case strategy is not flexible.

  3. Correct69% picked this

    Why this is right

    The author calls the campaign as a who an "innovation." This implies that it was new and had not been done before, which is the definition of "unprecedented."

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

  4. Too Strong21% picked this

    This is tempting, because the author definitely seems to love this strategy. But, they don't go so far as to say that it was an indispensable aspect of the broader campaign, which makes this answer too strong.

  5. Unsupported8% picked this

    There's nothing in the passage to support the idea that the test case strategy is subjective. "Subjective" is the opposite of "objective", meaning, essentially, that something is open to interpretation and not true or false by some measurable accepted standard.

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