With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". the possibility that the appointed attorney may appear in court before the judge who appointed him.” Id. at 677 n. 14, 108 S.Ct. 2597. This history is directly relevant to our analysis. In context, the appointment of defense counsel for indigent criminal defendants would seem to be a necessary step for judges to take in order to provide for fair process. That rationale applies to the appointment of interim United States Attorneys with equal force. It is in keeping with preserving the institutional integrity of the judiciary that judges, faced with an indefinite vacancy in the office of United States Attorney, seek out a competent lawyer to represent the government. Cf. Young v. United States ex rel. Vuitton et Fils, 481 U.S. 787, 800-01, 107 S.Ct. 2124, 95 L.Ed.2d 740 (1987) (<HOLDING>). Like judges’ participation in the Sentencing

A: holding that when the executive branch defaults a district court has the authority to appoint a prosecutor for contempt proceedings in order to preserve respect for the judicial system itself
B: holding order of contempt sentence without statutory opportunity for appeal was in error but nevertheless involved a judicial act subject to judicial immunity
C: holding in a patent case that when the plaintiff brought the suit in federal district court it submitted itself to the jurisdiction of the court with respect to all the issues embraced in the suit including those pertaining to the counterclaim of the defendants
D: holding unconstitutional a statute which prohibited courts from using criminal contempt proceedings to enforce domestic violence restraining orders and which required that all such prosecutorial decisions be made by the executive branch
A.