Practice Quiz

LSAT

Category - Logical Reasoning

Start a Study Session Sign up for Question of the Day
Senator: “I do not agree with the nomination of Judge Azizi for the Supreme Court. There are credible allegations of bias against Azizi, making many in my party wary of his appointment. In addition, regardless of the veracity of the claims against Azizi, he is clearly unqualified for the appointment. He has never served as a judge before and lacks the qualifications necessary for the appointment and so should not be appointed to the Court.”

Which of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the senator’s conclusion?
  1. Appropriate experience is the most important requirement to serving on the Supreme Court.
  2. The mere hint of bias should be enough to prevent an appointment of a judge.
  3. In appointing a judge, all relevant qualifications should be weighed equally.
  4. A judge cannot be appointed if he could be biased, even if he is qualified.
  5. A suspicion of bias is not enough to disqualify someone for a position.
Explanation
Answer: A - The principle that most justifies the senator’s conclusion is that appropriate experience is the most important requirement for serving on the Supreme Court. The senator is not exclusively concerned with whether the judge is biased, but is rejecting him solely on the grounds of lack of experience.
Previous Next
Was this helpful? Upvote!
Login to contribute your own answer or details
Start a Study Session Sign up for Question of the Day

Top questions

Related questions

Most popular on PracticeQuiz