With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". are among them. The revenue rule is another. This age-old common law doctrine provides that courts of one sovereign will not enforce unadjudicated tax claims of other sovereigns. See Attorney General of Canada v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Holdings, Inc., 268 F.3d 103, 109 (2d Cir.2001); The European Cmty. v. Japan Tobacco, Inc., 186 F.Supp.2d 231, 235 (E.D.N.Y. 2002)("European Cmty. II”). The issue, here, is whether this rule precludes this Court from adjudicating Ecuador’s civil RICO and common law claims. It does. Though the complaint is pled under federal and state law causes of action, the substance of the claim is to enforce Ecuadorian tax laws. This is precisely the type of meddling in foreign affairs the revenue rule prohibits. See Attorney General of Canada, 268 F.3d at 108 (<HOLDING>); European Cmty. II, 186 F.Supp.2d at 235, 242

A: holding that a union health trust had standing to sue tobacco companies to recover medical expenses paid by the trust and allegedly caused by beneficiaries smoking
B: holding that revenue rule precluded a civil rico claim brought by canada to enforce its taxing scheme on several american tobacco companies
C: holding that policy holders lacked standing under rico to sue tobacco companies for increased costs of insurance passed on to them as a result of the increased costs of treating smokingrelated illnesses
D: holding that health care trust funds that paid medical claims could not sue tobacco companies under rico because their injury was derivative of smokers injury and stating a direct relationship between the injury and the alleged wrongdoing although not the sole requirement of rico  proximate causation has been one of its central elements citations omitted
B.