With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". use taxes from 1993 and 1994 and determined that the Community owed $186,277 in back taxes. After two attempts (not at issue on appeal) to offset those taxes, the State in 2005 offset $34,166.31 in federal funds, consisting primarily of funding for Medicaid and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children, also known as WIC. The Community claims that this offset violated its Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights, as well as statutory rights created by the federal programs whose funds were offset. The District Court concluded that, based on the rights it was asserting, the Community was not a “person” within the meaning of § 1983 and, therefore, not entitled to bring suit. In Inyo County v. Paiute-Shoshone Indians, the Supre 6 L.Ed. 1346 (1942) (<HOLDING>). In Inyo County, the tribe’s § 1983 action was

A: holding that a state as a purchaser of asphalt was a person when suing under the sherman act for restraint of trade
B: holding only that a particular ancillary restraint did not constitute a per se violation of the sherman act and remanding for a determination  of the case under a rule of reason analysis
C: holding that a foreign nation as a purchaser of antibiotics was a person when suing pharmaceutical manufacturers for violating antitrust laws
D: holding that plaintiffs complaint failed to state a claim under section 1 of the sherman act
A.