PrepTest 115, Section 1, Question 7
Thurgood Marshall's litigation of Brown v.(446 more words not shown)
It can most reasonably be(15 more words not shown)
- Asought to answer(4 more words not shown)
- Bsuggested Marshall thought(11 more words not shown)
- Csatisfied the requirement(8 more words not shown)
- Dpresumed that the(13 more words not shown)
- Ereflected Marshall's preference(4 more words not shown)
Reading the passage
Marshall thought the theoretical challenge could ultimately succeed, so why begin with narrower cases? He wanted to show the courts the inequalities first and prepare them for the larger argument. I'd predict a strategy of gradual persuasion.
Working the answers
- A
The NAACP was divided, but the stated purpose wasn't to answer critics within it. Marshall was preparing the courts to accept the theoretical challenge. Disagreement among his allies doesn't establish this particular motive.
- B
Never accept reverses his plan. He believed the theoretical approach would eventually bring repeal; the earlier cases were preparation for that result.
- C
This introduces a requirement about which court hears a case first. The distinction here is between kinds of arguments, not between lower-court and Supreme Court stages of the same case.
- DCorrect
He felt the practical cases were necessary to make courts receptive to the broader legal challenge (paragraph 2). That supports gradual persuasion: demonstrate the failures, then use that groundwork to challenge the doctrine itself.
- E
Practical goals do appear, and Marshall pursued them. But using them as steps toward the broader challenge doesn't establish a preference for them. The text expressly identifies the theoretical approach as the one he expected to bring repeal.
More Author's Opinion questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Author's Opinion questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.