PrepTest 121

[lcid:3582] Prep Test 121 LSAT — Reading Comp — S3 Reading comp

Passage

Questions 13-19  .        Although the rights of native peoples of Canada  . have yet to be comprehensively defined in Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage Summary

Topic: Legal Studies


Paragraph 1

  • Paragraph note
    • Background/Intro to implied legal question
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Native Canadians don’t have their rights defined in law
    • Native Peoples - Right to govern selves and land; ownership over movable cultural property
    • Traditional statute/law - Movable property owned by museums/custodians
    • Recent litigation/Native Canadians - Owned by Native Peoples
    • Suggested Question - Who owns it? Who should?

Paragraph 2

  • Paragraph note
    • Current legal framework; Alternative argument
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Current (Canadian law) - Private property - Items are owned and can be transferred
    • Alternative (Native Canadians) - Collective ownership - People use items that are collectively owned, but they can’t transfer them out

Paragraph 3

  • Paragraph note
    • Current situation; Author’s prediction/opinion
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Current - Courts recognize ownership of museums who have documents
    • Prediction - Courts will recognize collective property; courts will and “should” honor claims of Native Canadians

Main Point: Courts should and will increasingly view claims of Native Canadians to movable cultural property as invoking the idea of collective ownership, thus honoring their communal ownership rights in these items.

Key Lines?

Lines 9-14 - Key legal issue/question raised

Lines 15-16 - Current approach

Lines 25-28 - Alternative approach

Lines 53-61 - Author’s prediction and opinion on what “should” happen

Meta-Structure?

Question/Answer and Old Approach/New Approach - This passage enmeshes two common Meta-Structures in a way that happens relatively frequently in Legal Studies passages. It presents a Question that the legal system needs to address, which suggests a Question/Answer Meta-Structure. Here, that question is: Who owns Native Canadian movable cultural property (Lines 9-14)? In such a Meta-Structure, the Author’s answer (or her opinion of a key answer) is the main point. Frequently, though, in a Legal Studies passage, the answer to the legal question involves a New Approach to that area of law, which is what we see here! The Author presents the current approach - basing the decision on the idea of private property (Lines 15-16). She then highlights an alternative - basing the decision on the idea of collective ownership (Lines 25-28), which is how Native Canadians have traditionally viewed ownership of their movable cultural property. At the end of the passage, the Author predicts that this approach will become more common (Lines 55-60) and endorses it (“should be honored,” Line 61). In an Old Approach/New Approach passage, the Author’s opinion of the New Approach serves as the main point. Here, the Author endorses the New Approach as an Answer to the key legal Question in the passage, so that is our main point, as we summarized above.

Prediction - Predictions are almost always featured in questions when one is made by the Author. Here, the Author doesn’t just endorse the use of the concept of communal property/collective ownership in cases involving Native Canadian property claims, but she also predicts that courts “will gradually recognize” that it’s the appropriate framework in these cases. Such a prediction on the core topic of the passage should be reflected in the main point and will likely feature in a question or two.

Last Thoughts?

Nothing here!

Question prompt

Given the information in Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: D

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Question Type

Legal

Strategy Overview

Review the Author’s summation and prediction of the new approach courts will take to these cases, then find an answer reflecting evidence the Author predicts will be less important

Answer Anticipation

Since this question is asking about a specific detail mentioned in the passage, we should start by identifying where it’s likely to show up. Paragraph 3 is where the Author discusses the current situation and her prediction of what will happen in the future, so we should start there.Since this question asks about evidence that will be “increasingly unlikely” to result in a decision in favor of the museums, knowing what currently is good evidence to rule in their favor can be helpful. The Author claims that, currently, the lack of documentation on the part of Native Canadians and the bills of sale and proof of prior possession on the part of museums tends to lead to a victory for the museums (Lines 45-51).However, the Author predicts, this will change as courts “gradually recognize” that Native Canadians can’t prove that any property was privately owned, but they can claim collective ownership of these items (Lines 56-60).So we’re looking for an answer that brings up the type of evidence that will be “increasingly unlikely” to lead to a verdict for the museums - their written receipts, and the Native Canadians’s lack of the same.

Answer choices

  1. A
    The museum is able Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited

    (A) If the property didn’t originate with the Native community, then it wouldn’t be their communal property under either conception of property rights, and so this would likely still lead to the museum winning the case.

  2. B
    The museum cannot produce Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited

    (B) (Lines 45-51) Be careful here! This answer is referring to the right concepts, but the question stem is phrased in a particular manner that makes this answer wrong. It asks what answer presents something that will be “increasingly unlikely” to lead the courts to “decid[e] the case in the museum’s favor.” Right now, having written documentation of its claims to ownership is used as a reason to decide for the museum, and the Author argues that this will increasingly not be true. But this answer says that a lack of this documentation will be increasingly unlikely to support a verdict for the museum - well, a lack of that documentation isn’t currently a reason to side with the museums!

  3. C
    The group of native Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited

    (C) (Lines 45-51; Lines 56-60) This is another tricky answer since the Author says that courts are coming around to applying a communal conception of property rights where Native Canadian communities are concerned. This leads us to infer that courts will take evidence that property originated in a Native community as a reason to side with them. However, that’s not what the question is asking - it’s asking what is going to be increasingly unlikely for the courts to use to side with museums. And while this answer features something that they’re going to increasingly rely on to side with Native Canadians, it’s not something that they currently rely on to side with museums, so it’s not something that they’ll be increasingly less likely to rely on in future rulings.

  4. D
    The group of native Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D matches the stem

    (D) (Lines 45-51; Lines 56-60) The Author says that, currently, the ability of museums to show receipts while Native communities can’t is used by courts to side with the museums. However, she predicts that this will increasingly not be the case, and that courts will side with Native Canadians in property disputes even when “they cannot demonstrate ownership” with documentation. This answer is therefore correct.

  5. E
    The group of native Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited

    (E) (Lines 25-26) What matters to the courts is the concept of property that they’re applying to the cases, not what is recognized by the tribe bringing the suit. This answer is referring back to information from Paragraph 2, and it’s getting the details wrong. On top of that, the passage predicts that courts will increasingly rely on applying property rights based on the concept of collective property, so they likely wouldn’t care that the tribe hasn’t adopted private property rights.

What this tests

Discussion

View all discussions Start a discussion