Border Patrol Practice Exam 2025 – 400 Free Practice Questions to Pass the Exam

The conclusion drawn from the statement "All lawyers are Supreme Court Justices" is that it makes a broad assertion about the relationship between two groups: lawyers and Supreme Court justices. In logical terms, if all members of one category (lawyers) fit into another category (Supreme Court Justices), it does not automatically suggest that all Supreme Court Justices are lawyers or that there cannot be justices who are not lawyers.

When evaluating the truth of this statement, it can be deemed invalid because, in reality, not all Supreme Court Justices are exclusively lawyers by profession; some may not hold that title at all or may come from other professional backgrounds. Thus, saying "All lawyers are Supreme Court Justices" lacks logical soundness, leading to its classification as an invalid statement.

The conclusion about the validity addresses the relationship and prohibits an accurate depiction of the nuances within the roles of lawyers and justices, highlighting why it cannot be considered a true assertion.