medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
Legal Scholar: When a law is ambiguous, judges should interpret it in the way that best aligns with the legislature's intent at the time of the law's passage. Just as a literary critic seeks to understand a poem by researching the author's life and letters, a judge must use historical records to clarify the meaning of a statute.
The legal scholar's argument proceeds by
- Likening interpretation in one domain to interpretation in another in order to bolster a recommended approach.
- Setting out a general rule and then insisting it be applied to every legal case without exception.
- Faulting a prevailing interpretive method before putting forward a superior substitute.
- Pointing to historical evidence to demonstrate that judges have invariably followed one interpretive rule.
- Defining an ambiguous term and then deducing its single correct legal meaning.
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More LSAT Logical Reasoning practice
- Which one of the following is an assumption required by the argument?
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from the statements above?
- The question type just described is best identified as which one of the following?
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed in that the argument
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed because the argument
- Which one of the following most accurately describes the relationship the statement establ
- Which one of the following can be validly inferred from the two conditionals above?
- Which one of the following must be true given the statement above?