New York Law (NYLE) Practice Exam

The rationale behind the selection that wearing provocative clothing would likely not trigger a lack of consent under New York law is rooted in the fundamental understanding of consent itself. In legal contexts, consent must be given freely and knowingly, and the manner in which a person dresses does not serve as an indicator of their willingness to engage in a sexual act. Clothing does not equate to consent; thus, someone who is wearing provocative clothing can still withhold consent or choose not to engage in sexual activity, regardless of how they appear.

This principle aligns with legal standards that seek to prevent victim-blaming and uphold the importance of explicit consent, which must be clearly communicated and not inferred based on a person's attire. Each of the other scenarios—being asleep, being coerced, or being too intoxicated to consent—are situations where an individual's capacity to give informed and voluntary consent is compromised, making them valid grounds for a lack of consent under New York law.