With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". restricted its coverage to ‘very limited rights of national citizenship’ and held that clause [sic] did not protect an individual’s right to pursue an economic livelihood against his own state.” Craigmiles v. Giles, 312 F.3d 220, 229 (6th Cir.2002). Although there has been some recent speculation that the Privileges and Immunities Clause should have a broader meaning, see Saenz v. Roe, 526 U.S. 489, 119 S.Ct. 1518, 143 L.Ed.2d 689 (1999) (Thomas, joined by Rehnquist, dissenting) (speculating that the development of the Privileges and Immunities Clause was prematurely stifled by the Slaughter-House Cases), the Tenth Circuit has made clear that the Slaughter House Cases remain good law unless the Supreme Court rules otherwise. See Powers v. Harris, 379 F.3d 1208, 1214 (10th Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>). 2. Equal Protection and Due Process Clause

A: holding that new hampshire policy which restricted practice of law by outofstate residents violated privileges and immunities clause
B: recognizing common law privileges
C: holding that slaughter house cases remained good law and prevented a privileges and immunities challenge to a state licensinglaw
D: holding that direct public employment is not a right protected by the privileges and immunities clause
C.