With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". 998 F.2d 1559, 1566 (10th Cir.1993). “For standing to exist, the plaintiff must ‘allege personal injury fairly traceable to the defendant’s allegedly unlawful conduct and likely to be redressed by the requested relief.’” Id. (quoting Allen v. Wright, 468 U.S. 737, 751, 104 S.Ct. 3315, 3324, 82 L.Ed.2d 556 (1984)). The alleged injury “must be ‘distinct and palpable,’ Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490, 501 [95 S.Ct. 2197, 2206, 45 L.Ed.2d 343] (1975), as opposed to abstract, conjectural, or merely hypothetical.” Id. (parallel citations omitted). We conclude that Mr. Umbehr has standing. Mr. Umbehr asserts a violation of hi mination of the contract, and there is no dispute that any such injury is “ ‘fairly traceable’ ” to De L.Ed.2d 97 (1990); LaFalce v. Houston, 712 F.2d 292 (7th Cir.1983) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 1044, 104 S.Ct. 712,

A: holding that independent contractor claiming denial of public contract because of political affiliation was not protected by first amendment
B: holding that independent contractor claiming removal from city towing rotation list because of political affiliation was not protected by first amendment
C: holding that independent contractor claiming termination of contract in retaliation for petition was not protected by first amendment
D: holding that independent contractor claiming termination of contract because of lobbying and other political activities not protected by first amendment
A.