LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

Get expert LSAT preparation and law school admissions advice from PowerScore Test Preparation.

  • Posts: 3
  • Joined: Feb 03, 2021
I understood that the General Assembly could not begin at two different times, however I really got tripped up by the word "quorum." I figured that if the meeting started at 6, in part because there were enough members present to make the assembly valid, it would make it impossible for the meeting to begin at 7. In effect, the first condition supersedes the second, as I don't see how it would be possible for the meeting beginning at 6, preventing enough people being present to form the second quorum mentioned. Am I thinking too much outside of LSAT world? But it is the definition of the word.

In the above comment, where the commenter really spells it out, I am kind of able to see this by her writing out the contrapositives, but it still seems at odds with the definition of quorum.
 Jeremy Press
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 944
  • Joined: Jun 12, 2017
Hi lldiez,

What's tripping you up here (I think) is your assumption that the Standards Committee quorum and the Awards Committee quorum are the same things. But we don't know from the stimulus the exact composition of the two committees, or the rules governing their quorums. The committees might have different members, indeed they might have different numbers of members, and therefore different requirements for what would constitute a quorum. So you can rest assured that the "chain" inference being discussed in the above posts is valid, and that it is possible in this stimulus for the existence of a Standards Committee quorum to rule out the possibility of an Awards Committee quorum.

I hope this helps!

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

Analyze and track your performance with our Testing and Analytics Package.