Which scenario describes a federal court going against the principle of

precedent?

A. A judge in a U. S. court of appeals overturns a defendant's

conviction on the grounds that evidence used in the case was

illegally obtained.

O

B. A federal judge finds a criminal defendant not guilty because she

believes his case should have been tried in a state court.

C. A defendant who violated a federal law argues that he should not

be convicted because the law is unconstitutional.

O

D. The Supreme Court rules that companies must pay men and

women equal wages despite earlier court rulings allowing wage

differences

This scenario is correct:

The Supreme Court rules that companies must pay men and  women equal wages despite earlier court rulings allowing wage  differences

Explanation:

It is common practice for the courts of the time and today too to go by the precedent set by the previous courts and to not go against the norm.

The change to this policy is to be seen in this ruling.

the court before this one had been ruling in favor of the wage gap but this is ruled against in the present court.

Thus the decision is taken without any precedent which is not the common practice, albeit the new decision seems more constitutional rather.

the decreasing neutrality of the u. s. in world war i

hope this : )