Reading ComprehensionDifficulty: Easy

PT17 S4 P2 Q10 Explanation

Hard Cases

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

TopicsLocate DetailLaw

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

Legal cases can be termed “hard” cases if they raise issues that are highly controversial, issues about which people with legal training disagree. The ongoing debate over the completeness of the law usually concerns the extent “legally determinate”, or decidable according to existing law.

H. L. A. Hart’s The Concept of Law is still the clearest and most persuasive statement of both the standard theory of hard cases and the standard theory of law on which it rests. For Hart, the law consists of legal rules formulated in general terms; these terms he calls “open textured,” example, moral and political) grounds, and thereby exercise judicial discretion to make, rather than apply, law.

In Ronald Dworkin’s view the law is richer than Hart would grant; he denies that the law consists solely of explicit rules. The law also includes principles that do not depend for their legal status on any prior official recognition or enactment. Dworkin claims that many cases illustrate the existence of legal need for judicial discretion do not follow from the existence of open texture in legal rules.

It would be a mistake, though, to dispute Hart’s theory of hard cases on this basis alone. If Hart’s claim about the “open texture” of general terms is true, then we should expect to find legal indeterminacies even if the law consists of principles in addition to rules. Legal principles, as well meaning. Most interesting and controversial cases will occur in the penumbra of both rules and principles.

What this question is testing

Locate Detail

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
10.

According to the passage, the term “legal principles” as used by Dworkin

Answer choices

  1. Opposite, if anything3% picked this

    a comprehensive code of ethics that governs the behavior of professionals in

    We can stop reading at "comprehensive code". The 3rd paragraph said that these principles do not have official recognition or enactment. They are not codified.

  2. Too Strong: explicit analyses6% picked this

    explicit analyses of the terms used in legal rules, indicating what meanings the terms do

    Dworkin isn't making it seem like principles provide an explicit analysis of specific terms used in rule. He's making it sound more like these are general rules of thumb, the "spirit of the law", that would help guide us in terms of how we interpret whether a rule should apply to a given situation.

  3. Correct83% picked this

    legal doctrines that underlie and guide the use of accepted

    Why this is right

    We can match this up with "Legal principles do not (apply in an all-or-nothing fashion): they provide the rationale for applying legal rules". They guide the use of legal rules. If we thought that 'doctrine' meant something similar to 'explicit statutes / codified rules', then that word would seem like the opposite of what we want. Dworkin stresses that principles are NOT officially enacted, the way an explicit rule would be. But 'doctrine' can just mean a set of beliefs.

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

  4. Unsupported: premature legal rules4% picked this

    legal rules that have not yet passed through the entire legislative procedure necessary for them

    This answer is saying that legal principles grow up to be legal rules, once they have completed their journey through the legislature and become official statute. But the 3rd paragraph is making it seem like legal principles don't get officially enacted. Also, the paragraph is not making it seem like principle become rules. It's more like principles are in a different realm from rules, and they help us decide whether or not we should apply a rule.

  5. Unsupported: body of decisions4% picked this

    the body of legal decisions regarding cases that required judicial discretion

    The body of legal decisions regarding cases that required judicial discretion (i.e. cases that were so ambiguous when it came to the legal rule that it felt like a judge had to really do their own interpretation) would be a great place to look to see legal principles at work. Since the legal rule is not fully indicative of the correct legal outcome in these cases, the judge would have to consult legal principles in order to figure out how to exercise their discretion in applying or not applying the legal rule. But even though legal principles would be involved in this body of murky legal decisions, it doesn't make any sense to say that legal principles are this body of unclear legal decisions.

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