With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". to a declaratory judgment action challenging the lobbying tax brought by ASAE and ten other associations. In that action the plaintiffs asked this Court to declare the lobbying tax unconstitutional and to enjoin the Government from enforcing it. This Court held that the Anti-Injunction Act (“AIA”), 26 U.S.C. § 7421(a), deprived it of jurisdiction over the case and that the two recognized exceptions to the AIA were inapplicable because: (1) plaintiffs had not shown that the Government could not prevail under any circumstances, as required by Enochs v. Williams Packing & Navigation Co., 370 U.S. 1, 82 S.Ct. 1125, 8 L.Ed.2d 292 (1962); and (2) plaintiffs had alternative legal remedies available to them. See South Carolina v. Regan, 465 U.S. 367, 104 S.Ct. 1107, 79 L.Ed.2d 372 (1984) (<HOLDING>). Regarding them alternative legal remedies,

A: recognizing such an exception
B: recognizing exception to aia where plaintiff is left with no alternative legal remedy
C: recognizing exception
D: recognizing the rule and the exception but holding facts did not support claim to exception
B.