medium · LSAT Reading Comprehension
Defenders of judicial precedent point to the practice of 'distinguishing cases,' by which a court declines to follow an earlier ruling by identifying factual differences in the case before it, as a built-in corrective that lets the law adapt without formally overturning past decisions. Yet whatever its theoretical appeal, the practice tends to breed elaborately tangled chains of reasoning, as courts strain to draw ever-finer distinctions; the very clarity and predictability that precedent is supposed to secure are thereby eroded.
The passage expresses which one of the following reservations about the practice of distinguishing cases?
- By prompting courts to spin out increasingly intricate distinctions, it undercuts the legal clarity precedent is meant to deliver
- It lies beyond the reach of trial courts and can be exercised only by higher appellate tribunals
- It cannot take effect at all unless the legislature first enacts a supporting statute
- It is invoked so seldom that it does little to remedy entrenched historical injustices
- It allows judges to overturn settled law on a whim, destabilizing the entire legal system
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More LSAT Reading Comprehension practice
- The author's use of the word "demonstrates" most strongly suggests that the author's attit
- Which one of the following most accurately describes the primary purpose of the second par
- Which one of the following most accurately describes the author's attitude toward the pres
- Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main point of the passage?
- Which one of the following most accurately describes the author's attitude toward true cri
- Which one of the following most accurately describes the primary function of the second pa
- Which one of the following most accurately describes the author's attitude toward urban mi
- Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main point of the passage?