Explanation
A. Public debate and criticism of judicial decisions are not uniquely emphasized in Passage A over Passage B.
B. (Correct Response) Passage A argues for the moral imperative behind judicial candor, suggesting that moral considerations should be given significant weight. This principle is not addressed in Passage B, which does not explicitly weigh moral considerations against prudential ones.
C. Neither passage explicitly states that judicial obligations should not be rigidly adhered to if doing so is unrealistic or impractical.
D. Passage A criticizes prudential justifications for honesty in judicial opinions, but it does not categorically state that judges should not conduct cost-benefit analyses.
E. While Passage A does discuss prudential versus moral reasons, this option does not capture the unique principle underlying Passage A’s argument, which is the moral weight of judicial candor rather than a comparison of prudential reasons.
Passage A specifically discusses the importance of moral considerations in the context of judicial candor, which is a principle not discussed in Passage B.