LSAT 31, Reading Comprehension, Q9, LSATHacks

RC Question 9 Explanation, by LSATHacks

DISCUSSION: The scholars in the passage believe that Marshall’s previous cases allowed him to win Brown. See lines 5-10. 

The use of sociological data in Shelley persuaded the court to use the data in Brown. See lines 55-58.

___________

1. Hard to say. The scholars don’t discuss counterfactuals. Maybe we’d still have separate ‘but equal’ if Marshall hadn’t argued Shelley. 
2. CORRECT. See lines 55-58. Shelley convinced the court to consider sociological data and overturn “separate but equal”. 
3. This is just false. The court did not excuse private dealings in Shelley. See lines 44-50.
4. This is an extreme statement. Shelley happened more than 60 years ago. The court could have been persuaded to accept sociological data at some point between then and now. All we know is that the court probably wouldn’t have accepted sociological data in Brown without Shelley. 
5. Who knows? We now the court had previously allowed discrimination (lines 47-50), so they might still have allowed it if Marshall hadn’t used sociological data. 

Hi, I'm Graeme Blake

Founder of LSAThacks; I scored a 177 on the LSAT.

I created the LSAT Mastery Seminars, which are part of the Ultimate LSAT Prep Bundle

If you like the explanations you're reading I'm 100% confident you'll enjoy the courses. Satisfaction guaranteed.

---------
Updates:

For updates, sign up for my email list. I update whenever I have new posts.