Legal Scholar: The recent Supreme Court ruling, which expanded the scope of digital privacy rights to include data stored on third-party servers, represents a significant victory for individual liberties. Critics argue that this ruling will hinder law enforcement's ability to investigate crimes by making it more difficult to access crucial digital evidence. However, this criticism overlooks the fact that law enforcement has always been required to obtain warrants for physical evidence, and digital evidence should be treated no differently.
- AThe Supreme Court ruling will not significantly hinder law enforcement's ability to investigate crimes.
- BLaw enforcement's ability to investigate crimes should not be hindered by concerns for individual liberties.
- CThe processes for obtaining physical and digital evidence are fundamentally similar in their practical application.
- DDigital evidence is less critical for solving crimes than physical evidence.
Show answer & explanationAnswer & explanation
Correct answer: C. The processes for obtaining physical and digital evidence are fundamentally similar in their practical application.
The Legal Scholar dismisses the critics' concern by arguing that digital evidence should be treated 'no differently' than physical evidence, for which warrants are already required. This dismissal relies on the unstated assumption that the process of obtaining warrants for digital evidence would be practically equivalent to or no more burdensome than for physical evidence. If the processes were fundamentally different or digital warrants were significantly harder to obtain, the analogy would break down, and the critics' concern would remain valid.
Why the other options are wrong
- A. This is the scholar's conclusion, not an unstated assumption necessary for the argument to hold. The scholar argues *why* it won't be hindered.
- B. This is a prescriptive statement about what 'should' be, not an assumption the scholar makes about the current state of affairs or the practical implications of the ruling.
- D. The scholar does not make a judgment about the relative importance of digital versus physical evidence, only that they should be treated similarly in terms of warrant requirements.
Necessary Assumption (Analogy)
A necessary assumption in an argument by analogy is a unstated premise that ensures the two things being compared are sufficiently similar in all relevant respects for the conclusion to hold.
- The argument draws a conclusion about one thing based on its similarity to another.
- The assumption fills a gap between the premise about one thing and the conclusion about the other.
- To test, negate the assumption: if the argument falls apart, it's a necessary assumption.
Memory trick: Analogy needs 'EQUAL' footing: Ensure Quality, Understand Assumptions, Link (the two things).