With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". with either the concept of at-will employment or with existing precedent. Indeed, by crafting a right to be free from arbitrary government termination, the majority reaches the anomalous conclusion that “the same element — ‘freedom from arbitrariness ’ — should at once entitle a person to due process and also be a part of the process which is due.” Jeffries v. Turkey Run Con-sol. School Dist., 492 F.2d 1, 4 n. 8 (7th Cir.1974) (Judge Stevens). Moreover, the majority ignores that Singleton was merely discharged from one job — that of policeman — and Singleton has not suggested that he cannot achieve any other employment with the City of Advance or any other city. See Cafeteria & Restaurant Workers Union, Local 473 v. McElroy, 367 U.S. 886, 895-96, 81 S.Ct. 1743, 6 L.Ed.2d 1230 (1961) (<HOLDING>). At worst, the City’s decision to discharge

A: holding that a university professor was not denied the right to pursue his choice of career because he remained free to pursue his chosen profession at another university
B: holding that an employee who claims to have been terminated by her employer for having exercised her right to disability benefits raised a cognizable claim under  510 of erisa notwithstanding the fact that she received the benefits from her employer prior to termination
C: holding that where plaintiff remained entirely free to obtain employment either with her employer or another employer her liberty right in following a chosen trade or profession was not implicated
D: holding that because plaintiff chose to leave her employer she did not suffer any tangible employment action
C.