- Thu Jun 04, 2020 9:06 pm
Thanks for the question, nusheenaparvizi! That is a confusing one, isn't it? The question is not asking about the information that we got from the first sentence of the passage, but is actually asking about litigation in that "certain country" that is contemplating the new bill. We have to look beyond just that first sentence. Although the first sentence might allow us to infer that there is at least some uncertainly about ownership of stolen art under the current legal system, we cannot then infer that litigation has been increasing.
So, what DO we know about litigation in that country? We know from that end of the third paragraph that Burke is afraid that there could be a lot of it, and that it would cause a big problem for the nation. He wants that Statute of Limitations to keep the litigation down. We also know from the beginning of the third paragraph that so far, "such reclamation suits have not yet been a problem." Putting those ideas together, we get answer A - litigation in the country has, so far, been less common than Burke fears might become the case if we don't include that Statute of Limitations. If we don't have that statute, he is afraid the litigation will get worse than it has been.
Adam M. Tyson
PowerScore LSAT, GRE, ACT and SAT Instructor
Follow me on Twitter at https://twitter.com/LSATadam