A local group had planned a parade for tomorrow, but city hall has not

Question

A local group had planned a parade for tomorrow, but city hall has not yet acted on its application for a permit. The group had applied for the permit well in advance, had made sure their application satisfied all the requirements, and was clearly entitled to a permit. Although the law prohibits parades without a permit, the group plans to proceed with its parade. The group's leader defended its decision by appealing to the principle that citizens need not refrain from actions that fail to comply with the law if they have made a good-faith effort to comply but are prevented from doing so by government inaction.

Which one of the following actions would be justified by the principle to which the leader of the group appealed in defending the decision to proceed?

(A) A chemical-processing company commissioned an environmental impact report on its plant. The report described foul odors emanating from the plant but found no hazardous wastes being produced. Consequently, the plant did not alter its processing practices.

(B) A city resident applied for rezoning of her property so that she could build a bowling alley in a residential community. She based her application on the need for recreational facilities in the community. Her application was turned down by the zoning board, so she decided to forgo construction.

(C) The law requires that no car be operated without a certain amount of insurance coverage. But since the authorities have been unable to design an effective procedure for prosecuting owners of cars that are driven without insurance, many car owners are allowing their insurance to lapse.

(D) A real-estate developer obtained a permit to demolish a historic apartment building that had not yet been declared a governmentally protected historic landmark. Despite the protests of citizens' groups, the developer then demolished the building.

(E) A physician who had been trained in one country applied for a license to practice medicine in another country. Although he knew he met all the qualifications for this license, he had not yet received it one year after he applied for it. He began to practice medicine without the license in the second country despite the law's requirement for a license.

Source : PrepTest 9, October 1993 LSAT, Section 2, Question 18

Bunuel · Accepted Answer

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

(A) No. The principle states that in certain cases the letter of the law need not be followed. However, this answer-choice never mentions a law.

(B) No. The principle states “ citizens need not refrain from actions that fail to comply with the law if they have made a good-faith effort to comply but are prevented from doing so by government inaction. ” In this answer-choice, the resident  did  refrain from actions that fail to comply with the law—she stopped construction. Further, there  was  government action—it actively refused to rezone the property.

(C) No. The principle states “ citizens need not refrain from actions that fail to comply with the law if  they have made a good-faith effort to comply  but are prevented from doing so by government inaction. ” In this answer-choice, the citizens did not make a good-faith effort to comply with the law.

(D) No. The principle states “ citizens need not refrain from actions that fail to comply with the law if they have made a good-faith effort to comply but are prevented from doing so by government inaction. ” In this answer-choice, the government  did  act—it issued the permit.

(E) Yes.  The principle states “citizens need not refrain from actions that fail to comply with the law if they have made a good-faith effort to comply but are prevented from doing so by government inaction.” In applying for the license one year earlier, the doctor made a good faith effort to comply with the law, but
government inaction prevented him from getting the license.

garcmillan · Answer

A local group had planned a parade for tomorrow, but city hall has not yet acted on its application for a permit. The group had applied for the permit well in advance, had made sure their application satisfied all the requirements, and was clearly entitled to a permit. Although the law prohibits parades without a permit, the group plans to proceed with its parade. The group's leader defended its decision by appealing to the principle that citizens need not refrain from actions that fail to comply with the law if they have made a good-faith effort to comply but are prevented from doing so by government inaction.

This passage gives us 2 conditions to meet so that other cases are similar to this one:

1º Keep doing the action even if we have no permit
2º Not having the permit because of government inaction

Which one of the following actions would be justified by the principle to which the leader of the group appealed in defending the decision to proceed?

(A) A chemical-processing company commissioned an environmental impact report on its plant. The report described foul odors emanating from the plant but found no hazardous wastes being produced. Consequently, the plant did not alter its processing practices.

This passage doesn't talk about a permit or license, but about a report. And in case we considered a report as the permit, it can be considered as permit given, because it says report didn't find a bad thing in the process so the plant could still undergo its normal operations

(B) A city resident applied for rezoning of her property so that she could build a bowling alley in a residential community. She based her application on the need for recreational facilities in the community. Her application was turned down by the zoning board, so she decided to forgo construction.

The application was turned down. This breks point 2 (not given because of government inaction)

(C) The law requires that no car be operated without a certain amount of insurance coverage. But since the authorities have been unable to design an effective procedure for prosecuting owners of cars that are driven without insurance, many car owners are allowing their insurance to lapse.

This breaks down point 2, because it is not about government inaction, but about an inefficient action from the goverment

(D) A real-estate developer obtained a permit to demolish a historic apartment building that had not yet been declared a governmentally protected historic landmark. Despite the protests of citizens' groups, the developer then demolished the building.

It obtained the permit so breaks point 1

(E) A physician who had been trained in one country applied for a license to practice medicine in another country. Although he knew he met all the qualifications for this license, he had not yet received it one year after he applied for it. He began to practice medicine without the license in the second country despite the law's requirement for a license.

It fulfills point 1 because it keeps doing the practice.
It fulfills point 2 because it doesn't have the permit because government inaction (shown in this sentence:he had not yet received it  one year after  he applied for it)

OPTION E

gingerman96 · Answer

For answer E, since the physician applied for a license in another country, how is the physician still qualified as a citizen (of that country)?

anshul0130 · Answer

Bunuel   KarishmaB  - Do we need to select the option that follows the same principle as mention in the argument ? i.e. Follow all the steps and guidelines and then government is not able to act on because of it's inability.

or do we need to select the option that follows the same principle and to which the leader will defend to proceed further with the decision i.e. move forward without the permit/approval from the designated authority.

I was confused on the ask from question.

Thanks.

KarishmaB · Answer

Question stem: Which one of the following actions would be justified by the principle to which the leader of the group appealed in defending the decision to proceed?

What is the principle? that citizens need not refrain from actions that fail to comply with the law if they have made a good-faith effort to comply but are prevented from doing so by government inaction.

Which of following actions would be justified as per this principle? An action that tells us that a citizen made a good faith effort to comply but the govt did not respond so the citizen went ahead with the action which actually did not comply with the law.

This is what option (E) tells us. The physician applied for the license (good faith effort to comply) and knew that he met all requirements but the govt did not give him the license for a year (Govt. did not respond) so he started practicing without the license (an action that does not comply with the law).

Answer (E)

VerbalBot · Answer

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

A local group had planned a parade for tomorrow, but city hall has not

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

A local group had planned a parade for tomorrow, but city hall has not

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards