In CASE 61,Gutierrez-Brizuela V

In CASE 6.1,Gutierrez-Brizuela v.Lynch (2016) before the U.S.Supreme Court,the administrative agency Board of Immigration Appeals had announced that any applicant who has entered the country illegally more than once is required to wait the ten-year period before applying for lawful residency.The question before the court was whether an administrative agency may retroactively apply a new rule that contradicts existing judicial precedent.How did the Court rule?

A) The Court held that the Attorney General could grant adjusted status to people who would otherwise have to wait.
B) The Court held that an agency's interpretation is not "legally effective" until a court,in deference to the agency,overrules itself.
C) The Court held that an agency's interpretation of a statute it administers should prevail if the statute is ambiguous and the agency's interpretation is reasonable.
D) The Court held that an agency's interpretation should prevail even when a court has adopted a contrary interpretation in the past.