Welcome to our comprehensive LSAT Mock Exam. Designed to closely mirror the current structure of the Law School Admission Test, this practice test is your essential tool for building test-day stamina and refining your analytical skills.
This exam includes full-length sections of Logical Reasoning (LR) and Reading Comprehension (RC), ensuring you practice with the specific question types and dense material you will encounter on test day. Success on the LSAT demands more than just knowledge—it requires rigorous time management and the ability to think critically under pressure. Treat this mock exam as the real deal: set a timer, eliminate all distractions, and identify your strengths and weaknesses. Use this as a benchmark to guide your next phase of preparation for law school admissions!
LSAT Mock Exam – Representative Sample
This sample mock exam contains one section of Logical Reasoning and one section of Reading Comprehension, mirroring the core components of the actual LSAT multiple-choice test.
Time Limit: Allocate 35 minutes for each section.
SECTION I: LOGICAL REASONING
Time: 35 Minutes
Directions: The questions in this section are based on the reasoning contained in brief statements or passages. For some questions, more than one of the choices could conceivably answer the question. However, you are to choose the best answer; that is, the response that most accurately and completely answers the question.
Question 1 (Flaw in the Reasoning)
Stimulus:
Economist: The government recently instituted a heavy tax on soda and other sugary drinks with the explicit goal of decreasing national obesity rates. However, since the tax took effect six months ago, we have seen no reduction in the overall sale of these drinks. Therefore, the tax policy cannot be considered an effective tool for combating obesity.
Question: The economist’s argument is flawed because it:
(A) confuses a necessary condition for a sufficient condition in the implementation of the policy.
(B) assumes without warrant that the sales data accurately reflects individual consumption levels.
(C) fails to consider the possibility that a reduction in soda sales has not yet had time to affect long-term obesity rates.
(D) relies on the premise that the tax was intended only to decrease sales, rather than to raise revenue.
(E) ignores other potential causes of obesity besides the consumption of sugary drinks.
Question 2 (Necessary Assumption)
Stimulus:
Marketing Consultant: To maximize profitability, a luxury watch brand must focus primarily on exclusivity. If a product is widely accessible, it loses the social cachet that drives high margins. Thus, the brand should severely limit its production runs and restrict distribution to a small number of boutique retailers.
Question: Which one of the following is an assumption required by the marketing consultant’s argument?
(A) No widely accessible watch brand can ever achieve high margins.
(B) The brand’s potential customers value exclusivity more than they value quality or design.
(C) Limiting production and restricting distribution are the only ways to achieve exclusivity for a luxury brand.
(D) The demand for the brand’s watches will not drop significantly if the watches are made less accessible.
(E) The boutique retailers chosen will be able to sell the limited production runs quickly and efficiently.
Question 3 (Strengthen the Argument)
Stimulus:
Philosopher: Contrary to popular belief, happiness is not solely the result of external circumstances. It is a trainable skill rooted in cognitive flexibility. This is evident because studies show that people who regularly practice complex problem-solving games are, on average, happier than those who do not.
Question: Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the philosopher’s argument?
(A) The complex problem-solving games require no more time commitment than watching television.
(B) People who report being unhappy are generally less likely to engage in any kind of recreational activity.
(C) The cognitive flexibility developed through these games is a mental process central to adapting a positive outlook on adverse events.
(D) Some participants who practice the games still report high levels of dissatisfaction with their external circumstances.
(E) The difference in happiness levels between the two groups was found to be statistically significant.
Question 4 (Main Point)
Stimulus:
The notion that intellectual property (IP) law must constantly evolve to keep pace with technological change is overstated. While technologies certainly change the methods by which creative works are distributed and consumed, they do not change the fundamental economic tension that IP law is designed to resolve—the tension between encouraging creators by granting limited monopolies and ensuring public access to knowledge. Therefore, despite the rapid pace of digital innovation, the core principles guiding copyright and patent legislation remain surprisingly constant.
Question: Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main point of the stimulus?
(A) Technological change requires only minor adjustments, not fundamental reform, to intellectual property law.
(B) Intellectual property law should focus exclusively on resolving the tension between creators and the public.
(C) The core principles of copyright and patent law are unchanging because digital innovation has had little effect on the economic incentives for creators.
(D) The primary function of intellectual property law is to resolve a fundamental economic tension that is independent of technological advancements.
(E) Debates about intellectual property law are often characterized by an overemphasis on technological change.
Question 5 (Parallel Reasoning)
Stimulus:
If the municipal government imposes a curfew, then local businesses will suffer a decrease in late-night revenue. However, the government will not impose a curfew, because the local crime statistics, which were the only justification for the proposal, have recently declined. Therefore, local businesses will not suffer a decrease in late-night revenue.
Question: Which one of the following arguments uses a pattern of flawed reasoning most similar to that in the stimulus?
(A) If the power plant is modernized, the city will have cleaner air. Since the city council approved the budget for the modernization, the city will certainly have cleaner air.
(B) If the train runs on time, I will arrive at the concert before the main act begins. But since the concert started late, the train must have been running on time.
(C) If the chef adds paprika to the stew, the flavor will be ruined. The chef did not add paprika, so the flavor will not be ruined.
(D) If the road is icy, then driving will be hazardous. The road is not icy, and the driving is not hazardous. Thus, the condition of the road is the sole determinant of driving hazard.
(E) If the new software is released, then our team will need retraining. Our team will not need retraining, since the software’s release depends entirely on the completion of testing, and testing has been halted.
Question 6 (Weaken the Argument)
Stimulus:
A city’s transportation board is promoting a new “smart” bicycle helmet, the ‘Aegis,’ which features advanced impact sensors and an automated emergency alert system. The board’s spokesperson claimed, “The launch of the Aegis has been a massive success, with sales tripling our projections. We are confident that as more cyclists adopt the Aegis, our city will see a significant reduction in serious, life-threatening cycling-related injuries.”
Question: Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the spokesperson’s argument?
(A) The high price of the Aegis helmet means that it is unaffordable for many of the city’s low-income cyclists.
(B) Studies of cyclist behavior show that riders who wear advanced protective gear are more likely to engage in high-risk behaviors, such as riding in heavy traffic or at higher speeds.
(C) The automated emergency alert system in the Aegis relies on a cellular connection, which is unreliable in some of the city’s most popular rural cycling areas.
(D) Most serious cycling-related injuries in the city are caused by driver error, not by the cyclist’s equipment or behavior.
(E) The company that manufactures the Aegis helmet also produces standard helmets that have consistently received top safety ratings.
Question 7 (Main Point)
Stimulus:
Many cities have implemented “hostile architecture”—such as sloped benches, dividers on flat surfaces, or spikes in doorways—to deter unhoused individuals from sleeping in public spaces. While proponents claim this maintains public order and cleanliness, the strategy is fundamentally flawed. It does not address the root causes of homelessness, such as a lack of affordable housing and mental health services. Instead, it merely displaces the problem to less visible areas and further marginalizes an already vulnerable population. True civic improvement comes from compassion and investment, not from engineered discomfort.
Question: Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main conclusion of the argument?
(A) The root causes of homelessness are a lack of affordable housing and mental health services.
(B) Hostile architecture is a flawed policy because it fails to address the underlying issues of homelessness and merely displaces the problem.
(C) Cities that implement hostile architecture are not genuinely interested in public order or cleanliness.
(D) True civic improvement is more expensive than implementing hostile architecture.
(E) The primary goal of hostile architecture is to make the unhoused population less visible to the public.
Question 8 (Flaw in the Reasoning)
Stimulus:
A good novel is defined by its ability to create a compelling, imaginary world. A good scientist, however, is defined by a strict adherence to the real, observable world. Therefore, it is impossible for a scientist to be a good novelist, as the two professions require fundamentally incompatible mindsets.
Question: The reasoning in the argument is flawed because it:
(A) bases its conclusion on a sample size that is too small to be representative.
(B) fails to consider that a person can possess the skills for one profession while engaging in another.
(C) uses the term “good” in two different and unrelated senses to draw its conclusion.
(D) presumes, without providing justification, that novelists and scientists have different mindsets.
(E) attacks the character of scientists rather than addressing the merits of their work.
Question 9 (Sufficient Assumption)
Stimulus:
Every film that was nominated for ‘Best Picture’ at this year’s awards had a production budget of over $100 million. Therefore, the independent film ‘Starlight’s End’ was clearly not nominated for ‘Best Picture.’
Question: The argument’s conclusion follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?
(A) The production budget for ‘Starlight’s End’ was $100 million or less.
(B) No film with a production budget of over $100 million was nominated for ‘Best Picture.’
(C) ‘Starlight’s End’ was the only independent film released this year.
(D) At least one film with a budget of $100 million or less was not nominated for ‘Best Picture.’
(E) All films with production budgets of over $100 million are nominated for ‘Best Picture.’
Question 10 (Role/Function)
Stimulus:
Some historians claim that the rise of the internet is as revolutionary as the invention of the printing press. This is a clear exaggeration. The printing press fundamentally altered the structure of human knowledge by making it distributable and standardized for the first time. The internet, while impressive, is merely an acceleration of the distribution that the printing press already made possible. It is a change in scale, not in kind.
Question: The claim that “the internet is merely an acceleration of the distribution that the printing press already made possible” plays which one of the following roles in the argument?
(A) It is the main conclusion of the argument.
(B) It is a concession to the opposing viewpoint that the argument seeks to rebut.
(C) It is a general principle that the argument applies to a-historic case.
(D) It is a premise that is presented as a counterargument to the main conclusion.
(E) It is an intermediate conclusion that is supported by the claim about the printing press and is used to support the argument’s main conclusion.
SECTION II: READING COMPREHENSION
Time: 35 Minutes
Passage A (Socio-Legal Theory)
The concept of “original intent” in statutory and constitutional interpretation has come under intense scrutiny in legal scholarship. Proponents of original intent argue that the judiciary’s role is strictly limited to discerning and applying the meaning that a law’s drafters or ratifiers intended at the time of its creation. The appeal of this approach lies in its promise of judicial restraint, supposedly preventing unelected judges from imposing their own political preferences under the guise of interpretation. For these proponents, the stability and predictability of law depend on the notion that a text’s meaning is fixed at its inception.
Critics, however, contend that the pursuit of original intent is not only impractical but deeply problematic. First, they point to the inherent difficulty in establishing a singular, unified intent among a body of hundreds of legislators or ratifiers, many of whom may have supported a text for radically different reasons. Furthermore, critics argue that the language of statutes and constitutions is often deliberately abstract or ambiguous—a necessary condition for gaining consensus and for allowing the text to adapt to unforeseen future conditions. To freeze the meaning of such a text to the specific social and technological context of the 18th or 19th century is, they maintain, to condemn the law to irrelevance.
A more compelling critique focuses on the performative aspect of originalism. Scholars argue that the methodology of original intent is often applied selectively. Judges who claim to be originalists tend to emphasize historical evidence that supports a conservative outcome, while conveniently ignoring equally relevant historical ambiguities or conflicting statements by drafters that might support a liberal reading. Thus, original intent is not a neutral methodology of discovery, but rather a rhetorical tool used to legitimize politically charged judicial choices, effectively disguising judicial activism behind a veneer of historical objectivity. The search for “intent,” in this view, is a subtle form of contemporary preference masquerading as historical fidelity.
This critical perspective suggests that the most honest and functional approach to constitutional interpretation is one that explicitly acknowledges the dynamic nature of legal principles. Rather than pretending to recover a unified past intent, judges should be transparent about the necessity of updating abstract legal concepts like “due process” or “equal protection” in light of evolving societal norms and empirical data. Only by abandoning the pretense of original intent can the judiciary engage in a candid discussion about the true impact of their decisions on modern life.
Questions:
Question 1 (Main Idea)
Which one of the following best expresses the main idea of the passage?
(A) The philosophical debate over judicial restraint can only be resolved by abandoning the concept of original intent in favor of a dynamic interpretation of law.
(B) Despite its proponents’ claims of neutrality and judicial restraint, the doctrine of original intent in legal interpretation is flawed, impractical, and often used to mask political agendas.
(C) Critics of original intent argue that the abstract nature of constitutional language makes it impossible for judges to determine the meaning intended by the law’s drafters.
(D) The long-standing conflict between supporters and critics of original intent is based primarily on disagreements over the role of historical evidence in jurisprudence.
(E) Modern legal scholarship must reconcile the need for legal predictability with the necessity of adapting ancient legal texts to new technologies and social norms.
Question 2 (Inference)
The passage provides the most support for which one of the following inferences regarding the proponents of original intent?
(A) They would likely oppose any judicial interpretation of a constitutional clause that significantly alters the clause’s practical effect from its initial understanding.
(B) They are generally uninterested in the economic tension that intellectual property law is designed to resolve.
(C)They believe that judges who use dynamic legal interpretation inevitably disregard all established legal precedent.
(D) They acknowledge that constitutional language is inherently ambiguous but argue this ambiguity should be resolved by legislative bodies, not the courts.
(E) They accept that multiple, conflicting original intents can be simultaneously valid as long as the interpretation promotes legal stability.
Question 3 (Function)
The third paragraph serves primarily to:
(A) introduce a new set of philosophical scholars whose views are diametrically opposed to those discussed in the second paragraph.
(B) present a practical objection to original intent based on the difficulty of finding unified historical evidence.
(C) shift the focus of the critique from the theoretical impracticality of original intent to its alleged ideological misuse by the judiciary.
(D) provide a historical context for the initial emergence of original intent as a doctrine of judicial review.
(E) contrast the legal stability offered by original intent with the unpredictability resulting from dynamic interpretation.
Question 4 (Author’s Stance)
The author’s attitude toward the critics of original intent can best be described as:
(A) cautiously optimistic, emphasizing the potential for critics’ views to lead to greater legal consensus.
(B) neutral and objective, merely summarizing the debate between two opposing legal theories.
(C) strongly supportive, seeing their claims as offering a more honest and functional path for the judiciary.
(D) skeptical, suggesting that the critics’ proposals for dynamic law are too vague to be implemented effectively.
(E) mildly disapproving, viewing the critics as overly focused on political outcomes rather than textual integrity.
Question 5 (Specific Detail)
According to the passage, the appeal of original intent for its proponents lies in:
(A) its capacity to resolve the inherent ambiguities within constitutional language.
(B) its explicit acknowledgment of evolving societal norms and empirical data.
(C) its historical fidelity, which ensures that all drafters’ intentions are equally represented in the final ruling.
(D) its guarantee of judicial restraint, thereby limiting the imposition of judges’ personal political preferences.
(E) its power to transform abstract legal concepts into concrete, easily applied rules.
Passage B (Ecology / Trophic Cascade)
Ecologists have long debated the primary forces that structure ecosystems. The traditional “bottom-up” model posits that the foundation of any food web—the primary producers (plants)—determines the population sizes of all other organisms. In this view, the amount of available plant life dictates the number of herbivores, which in turn dictates the number of carnivores. However, a “top-down” model, which describes a phenomenon known as a trophic cascade, has gained significant traction. This model argues that apex predators at the top of a food web can exert a controlling influence that cascades down, ultimately structuring the entire ecosystem, including the plant life at its base.
The most famous modern example of a trophic cascade is the reintroduction of gray wolves to Yellowstone National Park in 1995. Before their reintroduction, the park’s elk population, free from its primary predator, had grown unchecked. This led to overgrazing, particularly of young willow and aspen trees along riverbanks. The decimation of these trees had numerous cascading effects, including the decline of songbird populations and the disappearance of beavers, who rely on willows for food and dam-building material.
The arrival of the wolves initiated a dramatic reversal. Not only did the wolves directly reduce the number of elk, but they also—and perhaps more importantly—instigated a “behavioral cascade.” The fear of predation caused the elk to avoid exposed areas like valleys and riverbanks. With elk no longer grazing freely in these areas, the willow and aspen groves began to recover.
This regeneration of the riverside forests was the catalyst for a stunning series of changes. The recovery of the willows led to a rebound in songbird populations. Beavers returned, and their dams created new pond and marsh habitats for fish, amphibians, and muskrats. Most surprisingly, the wolves even changed the physical geography of the rivers. The regenerating forests stabilized the riverbanks, significantly reducing erosion. The rivers began to meander less, their channels deepened, and water quality improved. This “rewilding” of Yellowstone demonstrates that the influence of an apex predator can be profoundly complex, extending beyond simple population counts to alter the very behavior of prey and the physical structure of the environment itself.
Questions:
Question 6 (Main Idea)
The primary purpose of the passage is to:
(A) argue for the global reintroduction of apex predators into all depleted ecosystems.
(B) compare the relative merits of the “bottom-up” and “top-down” models of ecology.
(C) describe the case of Yellowstone’s wolf reintroduction to illustrate the complex, system-wide effects of a trophic cascade.
(D) criticize ecologists who adhered to the “bottom-up” model despite evidence to the contrary.
(E) explain in detail how the reintroduction of wolves led to an increase in beaver populations.
Question 7 (Specific Detail)
According to the passage, the reintroduction of wolves in Yellowstone led to a recovery of willow and aspen trees primarily because:
(A) the wolves actively protected the young trees from other foraging animals.
(B) the elk population was entirely eliminated from the park’s valleys and riverbanks.
(C) the elk’s grazing behavior and choice of location changed due to the perceived threat of predation.
(D) the new dams built by beavers changed the water table, which created better soil conditions for those tree species.
(E) songbird populations, which increased in number, were responsible for spreading the seeds for the trees.
Question 8 (Inference)
The passage provides the most support for inferring which one of the following?
(A) An ecosystem that lacks its natural apex predator is inherently unstable and will eventually collapse.
(B) The traditional “bottom-up” model of ecology is now considered entirely incorrect by the majority of scientists.
(C) “Rewilding” is the only effective method for reversing large-scale riverbank erosion in national parks.
(D) The effects of an apex predator on an ecosystem are generally more significant than the effects of the primary producers.
(E) The non-biological, physical characteristics of an ecosystem can be dependent on the behavior of its biological inhabitants.
Question 9 (Function)
The author’s discussion of beavers in the third paragraph serves primarily to:
(A) introduce a new predator that competed with the wolves for resources.
(B) provide a specific example of an indirect, secondary effect that resulted from the change in elk behavior.
(C) argue that beavers are more important to river health than wolves are.
(D) contrast the effects of beavers with the less significant effects of songbirds.
(E) demonstrate that the elk population had been unnaturally high before the wolves’ return.
Question 10 (Author’s Attitude)
The author’s attitude toward the concept of the trophic cascade is best described as:
(A) deeply skeptical, seeing it as an oversimplification of complex ecological interactions.
(B) cautiously optimistic, warning that more research is needed before the concept is widely accepted.
(C) strongly supportive, viewing it as a powerful model for understanding an ecosystem’s interconnectedness.
(D) critical, arguing that it focuses too much on predators and not enough on the foundational role of plants.
(E) neutral and objective, merely summarizing the findings without offering a specific opinion.
ANSWER KEY (LSAT LOGICAL REASONING)
| Question | Correct Answer | Question Type |
| 1 | C | Flaw in the Reasoning |
| 2 | D | Necessary Assumption |
| 3 | C | Strengthen the Argument |
| 4 | D | Main Point |
| 5 | C | Parallel Reasoning |
| 6 | B | Weaken the Argument |
| 7 | B | Main Point |
| 8 | C | Flaw in the Reasoning |
| 9 | A | Sufficient Assumption |
| 10 | E | Role/Function |
ANSWER KEY (LSAT READING COMPREHENSION)
| Question | Correct Answer | Question Type |
| 1 | B | Main Idea |
| 2 | A | Inference |
| 3 | C | Function |
| 4 | C | Author’s Stance |
| 5 | D | Specific Detail |
| 6 | C | Main Idea |
| 7 | C | Specific Detail |
| 8 | E | Inference |
| 9 | B | Function |
| 10 | C | Author’s Attitude |
Conclusion: Next Steps for Your LSAT Prep
Congratulations on completing this LSAT Mock Exam! Remember, the goal of a practice test isn’t just to score, but to learn. Use these detailed explanations to identify your personal “blind spots”—the specific question types or logical flaws that consistently challenge you. By turning your attention from what the question is about to how the question works, you can build the critical reasoning patterns necessary for success on the real exam. Now, take a short break, and then dive deep into the specific concepts you missed!
Important Links: Explanation of Answers
Dive Deeper: View All Logical Reasoning Explanations
Master the Passages: View All Reading Comprehension Explanations
