Based on the passage, the scholars mentioned in the second paragraph would be most likely to agree with which one of ...

jing jing on April 11, 2020

Why is D wrong?

Why is D wrong? Thanks

Replies

Andrea on April 11, 2020

Hi jingjingxiao11111@gmail.com, I'm having trouble seeing this one on my end. Do you happen to have the test/section/question number?

jing jing on April 12, 2020

December 2001 SEC 2 Q26

Shunhe on April 13, 2020

Hi @jingjingxiao11111@gmail.com,

Thanks for the question! The question here is asking for what the scholars mentioned in the second paragraphs would be most likely to agree with. In order to do that, let’s first figure out what they’re saying by turning to the second paragraph. We see the reference to these scholars starting in lines 34, where we’re told that these scholars warn that judges may rush to fill a constitutional void in South African law and could potentially misuse foreign law by blindly following interpretations given in other countries without paying attention to country-specific circumstances. But, in the end, these scholars are optimistic, believing that South Africa can use international experience to help develop its own precedent that addresses its own citizens.

First, let’s take a look at the right answer choice, to see why it’s a better choice than (D). Answer choice (A) tells us that those scholars would agree that judges who rely on interpretations given other countries’ bill of rights must be tempered and keep in mind that circumstances in those countries might not be the same. This is true, and comes directly out of the passage in lines 34-39.

(D), on the other hand, may seem tempting because it also refers to flaws in this process. The problem with (D) is that it is far too strong of an answer. (D) tells us that it is unacceptable for judges to rely on interpretations given bills of rights in other countries. The word “unacceptable” is far too harsh and certainly does not reflect the views of the scholars. Recall lines 39-43: in the end, the scholars are optimistic that South African judges will be able to use international experience to help develop its own precedent, even though there’s a potential for misuse of foreign law. There’s no way they would believe that and also think it’s unacceptable for judges to rely on interpretations given bills of rights in other countries, and so (D) must be wrong.

Hope this helps! Feel free to ask any further questions that you might have.