Question ID:PT39 S4 Q3 Passage:Tom:  Critics of recent high court decisions claim that judges' willingness to abide by earlier decisions is necessary to avoid legal chaos.  Since high courts of the past often repudiated legal precedents and no harm to the legal system ensued, these critics' objections must be politically motivated and ought to be ignored.Mary:  High courts have repudiated precedents in the past, but they were careful to do so only when the previous rulings were old and had clearly become outdated.  The recently overturned rulings were themselves recent.  Overturning any recent legal ruling diminishes the law, which comes to be viewed as unstable and capricious. Stem:Mary responds to Tom's argument in which one of the following ways? Correct Answer Choice:EChoice A:She questions Tom's claim about the effects of reversals by high courts of the past. Choice B:She agrees to Tom's evaluation of certain critics' motives, but introduces evidence to show that it is usually difficult to discern such motives in practice. Choice C:She defends a practice against Tom's criticisms by citing evidence to show that it has usually been resorted to only after due deliberation. Choice D:She points out that Tom's conclusion rests on an assumption that is contradicted by the evidence Tom presents. Choice E:She introduces a distinction between two kinds of situations in which precedents are overturned, in order to argue for a difference that Tom fails to take into account.