PrepTest 125
Passage
Passage walkthrough
Topic: Legal
Paragraph 1
- Paragraph note
- Current focus of scholarship and author’s interest in Marshall’s strategy/methodology
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Traditional scholarship on Marshall:
- Marshall’s time as Supreme Court Justice
- Author’s focus:
- Marshall’s technical legacy — how his work with the NAACP was strategically/methodologically innovative
- Marshall’s innovation — how he predetermined and carefully crafted/coordinated legal strategy
- Author’s attitude: “reveals a strategic and methodological legacy” (lines 9-10); “forever changed the landscape of public interest law” (lines 14-15); “meticulously crafted and carefully coordinated” (lines 19-20)
- Traditional scholarship on Marshall:
Paragraph 2
- Paragraph note
- One aspect of Marshall’s innovative strategy (the test case strategy)
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- List of Marshall's innovations:
- Item 1: Test case strategy — picking cases that have a good chance of changing law and feature sympathetic litigants
- Author’s attitude: “careful evaluation” (line 23); “essential element” (line 27); “carefully selected” (line 31)
- List of Marshall's innovations:
Paragraph 3
- Paragraph note
- Another aspect of Marshall’s innovation (use of sociological and psychological stats) and criticism of it
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- List of Marshall's innovations:
- Item 2: Sociological and psychological stats to show public harms in violation of constitutional principles
- Example of stats Marshall used:
- The harm of segregation
- Criticism of Marshall’s use of stats:
- Gives judges non-legal reasons to reach fuzzy legal decisions
- List of Marshall's innovations:
Paragraph 4
- Paragraph note
- Marshall’s legacy on public interest law
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Author’s view:
- Public interest firms have increased and used these strategies
- The legacy is somewhat unexpected, since Marshall’s strategy is used for both consumer advocacy and conservative purposes
- But Marshall’s strategies are the norm today
- Author’s attitude: “grown substantially” (line 48); “widely adopted” (lines 48-49); “might seem surprising” (line 57); “have become the norm” (line 61)
- Author’s view:
Main Point: Focusing on Thurgood Marshall’s work with the NAACP highlights innovative strategies he developed in the field of public interest law that have become standard in that practice today.
Key Lines?Lines 17-20 - Marshall’s innovation
Lines 21-25, 30-32 - One aspect of the innovation
Lines 34-35 - Another aspect of the innovation
Lines 40-42 - A criticism of this second aspect
Lines 57-59 - A surprising aspect of his legacy
Lines 61-62 - His legacy
Meta-Structure?Innovative Subject: While much more common in Humanities passages, a discussion of a subject’s innovation is one of the most common Meta-Structures in the RC section. Here, the passage focuses explicitly on innovations spearheaded by Marshall and the NAACP in the public interest space. The innovation is described in Lines 17-20, two aspects are then explored through Paragraphs 2 and 3, and the legacy of these innovations (including a surprising one) is discussed in Paragraph 4. When a passage falls into the Innovative Subject Meta-Structure, the main point focuses on that innovation, as reflected in our main point above.
Examples: The passage provides a couple of examples in a few places. First, the author discusses examples of the type of sociological and psychological statistics used by Marshall in his innovative strategy (Lines 35-37). Later, the author presents examples of groups that have used this strategy in more recent times (Lines 51-54). Both of these are fairly limited in scope and back up minor points made by the author, so we should expect a question or two on them, but they won’t be a major focus of the questions.
Last Thoughts?One element that has a solid chance of being the feature of a question is the “surprising” use of Marshall’s strategy by conservative public interest lawyers. When an author notes that something is surprising or unexpected, it almost always gets asked about, so be sure to note such features when they show up!
Question prompt
Why the credited answer is right
Credited answer: C
The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.
Question Type
Strategy Overview
Answer Anticipation
Answer choices
-
Aarbitrary
Why choice A is not credited
(A) Does this reflect the author’s belief that the test case strategy was innovative, effective, and influential?
Not at all. The author says that the test case strategy involved a “careful evaluation” of the cases, so the author wouldn’t characterize it as arbitrary.
-
Binflexible
Why choice B is not credited
(B) Does this reflect the author’s belief that the test case strategy was innovative, effective, and influential?
Nope. We can quickly cross this one off. Besides, the test case strategy, as described by the author, involves analyzing nuance and potential impact and choosing sympathetic litigants, which suggests a level of flexibility in approach.
-
Cunprecedented
Why choice C matches the stem
(C) Does this reflect the author’s belief that the test case strategy was innovative, effective, and influential?
Yep, this answer aligns with the passage's main point. The author believes that the strategies developed by Marshall — including the test case strategy — were innovative. That’s another way of saying that they were unprecedented, so this answer is correct.
-
Dnecessary
Why choice D is not credited
(D) Does this reflect the author’s belief that the test case strategy was innovative, effective, and influential?
Not quite. The author believes that Marshall’s strategies were innovative and effective, but the author never claims that they were necessary and that no other strategy could have worked instead. The closest the passage gets to establishing something as necessary is when it talks about an “essential element” of the success of the test case strategy, but that’s not the same as calling the strategy itself essential.
-
Esubjective
Why choice E is not credited
(E) Does this reflect the author’s belief that the test case strategy was innovative, effective, and influential?
Be careful here! It’s true that there are elements of the test case strategy that call for a subjective assessment -— choosing cases with the right precedential nuances and litigants that are the most subjective. But that doesn’t mean that the test case strategy itself is subjective — just that some elements of it are. The strategy itself isn’t said to be subjective. That’d be like saying football is a game of chance because games can be lost by freak accidents!
What this tests
Discussion
-
Started by FosterNsoah
-
Why not A as answer choice? 3 replies
Started by @MichaelaJ
-
Started by njohnson140