Q27

[Emily Madan]

Correct Answer: (E)
Question Type: Inference (32-36)

Capricious enforcement is defined in the passage by what it is not. It is not unknown, not rare, and not the central tendency. Finally, we learn that the reason it’s not the central tendency is because legislative oversight keeps the enforcer from straying too far from the intended regulation. Let’s turn that into a positive definition. If it was the central tendency, what would it be? Likely it would stray too far from the intended regulation. We can make that a general definition by saying that capricious enforcement is straying too far from the intent of the regulation.

(A) Municipal resources are irrelevant and don’t have any impact on the intent of the legislation.

(B) The legislature is the one creating the law, so going with their intent is the opposite of our definition. Eliminate it.

(C) It’s possible this prioritization is exactly what the legislator intended. That means this is not capricious enforcement. Eliminate this.

(D) A misunderstanding about the intent of the law may cause problems, but capricious enforcement seems to involve actively straying from the intent. It’s not clear whether a misunderstanding would constitute capricious enforcement. Let’s see if E is a better fit.

(E) This is exactly what we’ve been looking for. If we don’t follow the intent of the law, then it’s capricious enforcement. This is the correct answer.