Reading Comprehension

PT154 · S3 · P4 · Q26 International Environmental Conflicts

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

In the absence of international statutes prohibiting nations from causing each other environmental damage, scholars of international environmental law typically focus on trying to identify and clarify norms of “customary international law”: that body of commonly accepted—but not formalized—legal principles that is manifest in the behavior of nations toward one another.

Topic

The limits of using customary international law to address international environmental issues

Framework

Challenge Position (the author critiques the idea that certain environmental "norms" are truly customary international law)

Main Point

Many supposed norms of customary international environmental law, such as preventing transboundary harm and following the precautionary principle, are not reflected in what nations actually do, so scholars are misguided in relying on "customary international law" to resolve international environmental cases. Instead, more attention should be given to how these principles influence negotiations and treaties. The Most Valuable Sentence: The final paragraph, especially:

P1: The Role of Customary International Law in Environmental Issues

This paragraph explains that, since there aren't formal international statutes against causing cross-border environmental damage, scholars look to "customary international law"—widely accepted but unofficial rules. Two key principles are often cited: preventing transboundary harm and following the precautionary principle to avoid risking environmental damage to other nations.

P2: The Flaw in Calling These Principles Customary Law

Here, the author says that for a principle to count as customary international law, nations must actually follow it, not just praise it. But in reality, many nations don't actually act on these principles—they just say they support them while continuing to allow pollution.

P3: The Reality of "Norms"—More Ideals Than Laws

The passage highlights that though nations and scholars say they focus on what countries really do, in practice they care more about what nations claim to support. These environmental "norms" are more about shared ideals and rhetoric than actual legal practice, and shouldn't really be seen as customary law.

26.

The author's mention of harmful pollutants crossing international borders (last sentence of the second paragraph) functions primarily as

  1. an example of the author’s

    Wrong Contention

    This sentence is an example of the author's contention in the 2nd to last sentence of the 2nd paragraph. purported norms such as the duty to prevent transboundary harm do not reflect the actual behavior of many nations. This answer says it was supporting a contention that "debates put too little emphasis on environmental issues".

    3% picked this

  2. a means of suggesting that

    Wrong Suggestion

    This sentence is a means of suggesting that purported norms such as the duty to prevent transboundary harm do not reflect the actual behavior of many nations. This answer says it's a means of suggesting that "stronger enforcement of existing laws is needed".

    12% picked this

  3. evidence offered by the author

    Wrong Claim

    This sentence is evidence offered by the author in support of the claim that purported norms such as the duty to prevent transboundary harm do not reflect the actual behavior of many nations. This answer says it was supporting the idea that "treaties and negotiations are largely ineffective in protecting the environment".

    13% picked this

  4. an acknowledgment that, in spite

    Out of Scope: concerns are justified

    This answer doesn't look anything like what we're looking for, which is the 2nd to last sentence of the 2nd paragraph. purported norms such as the duty to prevent transboundary harm do not reflect the actual behavior of many nations. Additionally, this answer is just making up "environmental concerns of certain scholars". The passage never identified what these scholars' environmental concerns were. It was just describing how they attempt to justify their arguments in international environmental cases by using principles that they claim qualify as norms.

    4% picked this

  5. Correct

    support for the author’s claim

    Why this is right

    This sentence is support for the author's claim that purported norms such as the duty to prevent transboundary harm do not reflect the actual behavior of many nations. This answer says it was supporting the idea that "certain international environmental principles (the duty to prevent transboundary harm) do not meet a criterion for being considered norms (it must reflect the actual practice of nations not just what they affirm as desirable standards)." This brings in more of the overall main point of the 2nd paragraph. Scholars treat "transboundary / precautionary" as principles that qualify as norms of customary international law. To be a norm, you must reflect actual practice of nations. The author says, "actual nations do NOT behave this way. Check it out -- experience shows that harmful pollutants constantly cross most international borders".

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

    68% picked this

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