LSAT 34, Reading Comprehension, Q23, LSATHacks

RC Question 23 Explanation, by LSATHacks

DISCUSSION: The IRO is mentioned on lines 21-23. We know that they didn’t include “social group” in their definition. 

The passage’s author never says outright that they think social groups should be protected. But they seem to implicitly agree that social groups deserve protection. So A is fairly well supported.

This is only a “most strongly supported” question, not a “must be true”.

___________

1. CORRECT. The author seems to like the fact that the “social group” category exists. So they would think that the IRO should have included social groups. 
2. Doubtful. The IRO document didn’t mention social groups, so it probably didn’t mention women either.
3. This is true of the Convention, but not the IRO. 
4. Same as C. The IRO document didn’t mention social groups. 
5. Who knows? Maybe the IRO document was just a toothless piece of paper.

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.