LSAT: LAW SCHOOL ADMISSION TEST
EXAM QUESTIONS AND 100% VERIFIED ANSWERS
WITH RATIONALES GRADED A+
GUARANTEED PASS ON THE FIRST ATTEMPT
Question 1
Some city officials argue that installing more traffic cameras will reduce accidents.
However, in cities where cameras were installed last year, accident rates remained
unchanged. Therefore, installing more traffic cameras will not improve road safety.
Which of the following most weakens the argument?
A. Many drivers dislike traffic cameras
B. The cities studied also experienced increased traffic volume
C. Traffic cameras are expensive to maintain
D. Some accidents are unrelated to speeding
E. Drivers may obey traffic laws only temporarily
Correct Answer: B
Rationale:
If traffic volume increased, accident rates might have remained flat despite
cameras improving safety. This introduces an alternative explanation and weakens
the conclusion.
,Question 2
A legal scholar claims that judges who write longer opinions are more influential,
because influential judges are frequently cited.
Which of the following is an assumption required by the argument?
A. Longer opinions contain better legal reasoning
B. Judicial influence can be measured by citation frequency
C. Most judges prefer writing longer opinions
D. Influential judges decide more cases
E. Citation frequency depends on opinion length
Correct Answer: B
Rationale:
The argument relies on citations as evidence of influence. If citations do not
measure influence, the reasoning collapses.
Question 3
All contracts that lack mutual assent are unenforceable. Some oral agreements lack
mutual assent. Therefore, some oral agreements are unenforceable.
The reasoning in the argument is:
A. Invalid, because it assumes oral agreements are contracts
B. Valid, because it follows a correct logical form
C. Invalid, because it confuses necessity with sufficiency
D. Valid, because all unenforceable agreements are oral
E. Invalid, because it generalizes from limited cases
Correct Answer: B
Rationale:
The argument correctly applies a syllogistic structure:
If A → B; Some C → A; therefore Some C → B.
,Question 4
A study shows that law students who participate in moot court perform better in
oral advocacy. Thus, participating in moot court improves advocacy skills.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
A. Moot court competitions are highly competitive
B. Law schools encourage strong students to join moot court
C. Moot court involves frequent oral presentations
D. Advocacy skills are essential for legal practice
E. Moot court participation is voluntary
Correct Answer: C
Rationale:
Showing a mechanism (practice through oral presentations) supports the causal
claim.
Question 5
A newspaper editorial states: “The government should not regulate social media
because regulation threatens free speech. Free speech is essential to democracy.”
The conclusion of the argument is:
A. Democracy requires free speech
B. Social media companies oppose regulation
C. Regulation threatens free speech
D. The government should not regulate social media
E. Social media is essential to democracy
Correct Answer: D
Rationale:
The argument builds toward the policy recommendation that regulation should not
occur.
, Question 6
If a lawyer files an appeal late, the appeal will be dismissed. This appeal was
dismissed. Therefore, the lawyer must have filed it late.
The argument is flawed because it:
A. Confuses correlation with causation
B. Assumes the converse of a conditional
C. Relies on circular reasoning
D. Uses emotionally charged language
E. Overgeneralizes from a single case
Correct Answer: B
Rationale:
Dismissal could occur for other reasons; the argument assumes “if A then B”
means “if B then A.”
Question 7
Which of the following most closely parallels the reasoning in Question 6?
A. If it rains, the streets get wet. The streets are wet, so it must have rained.
B. If someone studies, they pass. This person studied and passed.
C. All doctors are licensed. This person is licensed, so they are a doctor.
D. Some athletes are tall. This athlete is tall.
E. If a law is unjust, it should be repealed.
Correct Answer: A
Rationale:
Both commit the fallacy of affirming the consequent.
EXAM QUESTIONS AND 100% VERIFIED ANSWERS
WITH RATIONALES GRADED A+
GUARANTEED PASS ON THE FIRST ATTEMPT
Question 1
Some city officials argue that installing more traffic cameras will reduce accidents.
However, in cities where cameras were installed last year, accident rates remained
unchanged. Therefore, installing more traffic cameras will not improve road safety.
Which of the following most weakens the argument?
A. Many drivers dislike traffic cameras
B. The cities studied also experienced increased traffic volume
C. Traffic cameras are expensive to maintain
D. Some accidents are unrelated to speeding
E. Drivers may obey traffic laws only temporarily
Correct Answer: B
Rationale:
If traffic volume increased, accident rates might have remained flat despite
cameras improving safety. This introduces an alternative explanation and weakens
the conclusion.
,Question 2
A legal scholar claims that judges who write longer opinions are more influential,
because influential judges are frequently cited.
Which of the following is an assumption required by the argument?
A. Longer opinions contain better legal reasoning
B. Judicial influence can be measured by citation frequency
C. Most judges prefer writing longer opinions
D. Influential judges decide more cases
E. Citation frequency depends on opinion length
Correct Answer: B
Rationale:
The argument relies on citations as evidence of influence. If citations do not
measure influence, the reasoning collapses.
Question 3
All contracts that lack mutual assent are unenforceable. Some oral agreements lack
mutual assent. Therefore, some oral agreements are unenforceable.
The reasoning in the argument is:
A. Invalid, because it assumes oral agreements are contracts
B. Valid, because it follows a correct logical form
C. Invalid, because it confuses necessity with sufficiency
D. Valid, because all unenforceable agreements are oral
E. Invalid, because it generalizes from limited cases
Correct Answer: B
Rationale:
The argument correctly applies a syllogistic structure:
If A → B; Some C → A; therefore Some C → B.
,Question 4
A study shows that law students who participate in moot court perform better in
oral advocacy. Thus, participating in moot court improves advocacy skills.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
A. Moot court competitions are highly competitive
B. Law schools encourage strong students to join moot court
C. Moot court involves frequent oral presentations
D. Advocacy skills are essential for legal practice
E. Moot court participation is voluntary
Correct Answer: C
Rationale:
Showing a mechanism (practice through oral presentations) supports the causal
claim.
Question 5
A newspaper editorial states: “The government should not regulate social media
because regulation threatens free speech. Free speech is essential to democracy.”
The conclusion of the argument is:
A. Democracy requires free speech
B. Social media companies oppose regulation
C. Regulation threatens free speech
D. The government should not regulate social media
E. Social media is essential to democracy
Correct Answer: D
Rationale:
The argument builds toward the policy recommendation that regulation should not
occur.
, Question 6
If a lawyer files an appeal late, the appeal will be dismissed. This appeal was
dismissed. Therefore, the lawyer must have filed it late.
The argument is flawed because it:
A. Confuses correlation with causation
B. Assumes the converse of a conditional
C. Relies on circular reasoning
D. Uses emotionally charged language
E. Overgeneralizes from a single case
Correct Answer: B
Rationale:
Dismissal could occur for other reasons; the argument assumes “if A then B”
means “if B then A.”
Question 7
Which of the following most closely parallels the reasoning in Question 6?
A. If it rains, the streets get wet. The streets are wet, so it must have rained.
B. If someone studies, they pass. This person studied and passed.
C. All doctors are licensed. This person is licensed, so they are a doctor.
D. Some athletes are tall. This athlete is tall.
E. If a law is unjust, it should be repealed.
Correct Answer: A
Rationale:
Both commit the fallacy of affirming the consequent.
