With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". obscenity and protected speech is “dim and uncertain,” Bantam Books, supra, 372 U.S. at 66 [83 S.Ct. 631], and difficulty in locating that line leads to self-censorship, a particularly subtle and most insidious form of the malady. Vimce, 587 F.2d at 165-66 (emphasis in original) (footnote omitted). The court agrees with the plaintiffs’ and intervenors’ assertion that the license revocation procedure at issue here brings it within the ambit of Vance. As in Vance, the City proposes to prevent a business operator’s full exercise of First Amendment freedoms going forward, on the basis of past instances in which expression offered by the business has crossed the line from lawful to unlawful. Motion at 11; see also Gayety Theatres, Inc. v. City of Miami, 719 F.2d 1550, 1552 (11th Cir.1983) (<HOLDING>). Second, the plaintiffs and intervenors have

A: holding that after the district court determined that the plaintiffs speech was protected the court was required to inform the jury of its ruling that knapps speech was constitutionally protected
B: holding that a city could not use past conduct to enjoin future protected speech
C: holding that protected speech cannot serve as the basis for a violation of city ordinances at issue
D: holding that speech about financial assistance and handling racial discrimination does not qualify as protected speech
B.