With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Due Process based on a Right to Pursue a Chosen Career Plaintiff also asserts that she was denied a substantive Due Process right by the Individual Defendants because their actions have prevented her from asserting her liberty interest in pursuing her chosen profession as a teacher. “While a person’s right to pursue the profession of his choice is recognized as a constitutionally protected liberty interest, courts in the Second Circuit have consistently held one must have no ability to practice one’s profession at all in order to state a claim for deprivation of a liberty interest.” Toussie v. Cnty. of Suffolk, 806 F.Supp.2d 558, 579-80 (E.D.N.Y.2011) (Seybert, J.) (citing Jaeger v. Bd. of Educ. of Hyde Park Cent. Sch. Dist., No. 96CV9336, 199 .2d 331, 336 (S.D.N.Y.1999) (Kaplan, J.) (<HOLDING>). As Plaintiff was, in fact, capable of

A: holding that the plaintiffs disciplinary segregated confinement for thirty days did not present the type of atypical significant deprivation in which a state might conceivably create a liberty interest
B: holding that members of the city council in their official capacity are not immune from a section 1983 suit against the municipality for deprivation of liberty interest in reputation without due process
C: holding that civil commitment for any purpose constitutes significant deprivation of liberty that requires due process protection
D: holding citys termination of plaintiffs contracts and publishing negative news report did not constitute the deprivation of a liberty interest even though a significant part of plaintiffs business had involved projects for the city
D.