LSAT 106 | Section 4 | Reading Comprehension: Q1

RC Question 1 Explanation

DISCUSSION: The first paragraph shows the main point. U.S. court cases involving Native Americans show a clash of values.

The Mashpee are an example of a clash of values. For the Mashpee, their oral history was truth. For the U.S. court, it was just unreliable oral evidence.

___________

1. Lines 53-56 show that U.S. courts are beginning to recognize oral testimony.
2. In lines 34-36, the author implied that the Mashpee were a tribe according to an existing definition.
3. CORRECT. Lines 12-15 say this. The Mashpee are just an extended example that demonstrates the situation described in the first paragraph.
4. As far as we know, U.S. courts never claimed that they would accept oral history as evidence.
5. It wasn’t precedent that doomed the Mashpee’s case. It was the court’s refusal to listen to oral evidence.