This article draws on argument-based validation to gather and evaluate construct-related evidence (i.e., the explanation inference) of a high-stakes test. The data stemmed from the listening component of a French test used for immigration to Canada through the province of Quebec. An expert panel with varied backgrounds in applied linguistics reviewed and associated the items of two operational test forms to four listening comprehension sub-skills identified in selected sources of second language listening theory. Based on the expert panel recommendations, two confirmatory factor models were fit to examinees' response data. The models fit the data well, providing backing for the explanation inference but suggesting construct under-representation for one of the test forms examined. The argument-based approach to validation yielded principled guidelines to evaluate construct coverage of the test across forms, providing insightful guidance on how to organize construct evidence from an argumentation perspective. Implications are discussed as they relate to the operationalization of argument-based validation in high-stakes settings.