PrepTest 115, Section 1, Question 8
Thurgood Marshall's litigation of Brown v.(446 more words not shown)
According to the passage, sociological(10 more words not shown)
- Anumerous examples of(14 more words not shown)
- Bnumerous examples of(14 more words not shown)
- Cthe legal requirement(11 more words not shown)
- Dthe pattern of(11 more words not shown)
- Ethe pattern of(19 more words not shown)
Reading the passage
Shelley is the housing case. The data showed how individual private transactions added up to a broader pattern of discrimination. That's the finding we need; the later use of the strategy against school restrictions is a separate step.
Working the answers
- A
Right individual-to-pattern idea, wrong case. School enrollment restrictions belong to Brown. The data in Shelley concerned housing transactions.
- BCorrect
The third paragraph says that “in sum and over time” the individual transactions constituted a pattern of discrimination. Looking at them together revealed a housing problem beyond any one private decision.
- C
This describes the earlier legal position that excused private dealings from equal-protection requirements. It isn't what Marshall's sociological data showed. He used the pattern of discrimination to challenge the treatment those private transactions had received.
- D
We aren't told the discrimination resulted from unequal financial resources. The data establish a pattern across transactions, not that particular explanation of its cause.
- E
Marshall later used the strategy in the school case, but the data in Shelley weren't described as comparing housing discrimination with school enrollment. Applying an approach in a second setting isn't the finding of the original housing evidence.
More Detail questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Detail questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.