Reading Comprehension

PT137 · S1 · P4 · Q26 Sovereign Omnipotence

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

  • 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

Can a sovereign have unlimited legal power?

Topic

Can sovereigns (like monarchs or parliaments) truly have unlimited legal power, and what are the consequences of such power?

Framework

Answer / Explain

Main Point

The passage discusses the paradox of sovereign omnipotence—if a sovereign has unlimited power, it can limit itself, contradicting true omnipotence—and explores how this paradox has practical consequences, such as making it hard for monarchs to make credible commitments (like repaying debts). While constitutional limits (like those after England’s Glorious Revolution) can help, they don’t eliminate the paradox; they just shift it elsewhere in government. The Most Valuable Sentence: Final paragraph:

P1: Introducing the Paradox of Omnipotence

Can a sovereign really have unlimited power? If so, it should be able to limit itself, which creates a contradiction. This is the paradox of omnipotence.

P2: Real-World Problems from Sovereign Omnipotence

This isn’t just a philosophical riddle—it caused real problems for monarchies like those in England and France, who faced big challenges because of it.

P3: Credibility Problems for Sovereigns

Sovereigns with unlimited power can break promises whenever they want—especially financial ones—so no one trusts them, and it’s tough for them to borrow money cheaply or easily.

26.

Suppose the Parliament in England makes a commitment to become a permanent member of a multinational body. It can be inferred from the passage that

  1. the commitment will undermine Parliament's

    Goes Against

    One of the things we know about Parliament is that it can obtain credit on favorable terms. Why would committing to this multinational body change that?

    7% picked this

  2. lenders will become more confident

    Unsupported Causal Relationship

    We're told that lender are already confident that Parliament force the Crown to honor its debts. Why would joining this multinational body make it more likely to honor its debts? We just don't have any way to connect joining this body to lenders' increased confidence.

    28% picked this

  3. Correct

    Parliament has the legal authority

    Why this is right

    This reinforces something we already know, without asking us to add something new. We know that Parliament now has sovereign omnipotence. It has the legal authority to do anything it wants. That's what the author meant when he said that creating Parliament "did not solve the paradox of omnipotence but just relocated the problem from one branch of government to another ... Parliament now lacks the power to bind itself". Before, the Crown had the power to walk away from its commitments, but after 1688 we hear of "the Crown's newfound inability to dishonor its commitments". Meanwhile, since omnipotence has now just been relocated to Parliament, it is now Parliament that has the ability to dishonor its commitments.

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

    51% picked this

  4. the commercial interests represented by

    Unsupported Causal Relationship

    We were told that commercial interests had a more positive feeling about Parliament than they did about the crown. Why would commercial interests be bothered by this commitment to this multinational body? Maybe they would, maybe they wouldn't, but we don't have any way to support that they would.

    4% picked this

  5. the commitment will increase Parliament’s

    Contradicted, if anything

    Given that the final paragraph explains that now Parliament is the one who is omnipotent (all-powerful), there isn't really a logically possible way to increase the power of something that is omnipotent. Also, we have no support for the causal relationship between joining this random multinational body and gaining more legal power.

    10% picked this

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