Because the Supreme Court has ruled that the prosecution in a job discrimination case must prove not only that the employer lied about the reasons for dismissal but also that those reasons were discriminatory, plaintiffs in such cases fear that they will have no higher court that they can appeal to when their cases are decided in lower courts.
that they can appeal to when their cases are
to which to appeal after their cases have been
for appealing if their case has been
to which they can appeal if their case is
that their cases can appeal, if they have been
the subject 'plaintiffs' is plural and thus should have a plural (object? possessive?) cases, which eliminates C and D (which have the singular case).
[For example, you don't say the children's mother (unless they have the same mother), you say the children's mothers).
Then, E is eliminated since the cases don't appeal, the plaintiffs appeal.
Between A and B, A uses "when their cases are decided" and B uses "after their cases have been decided."
A uses the plain future, which simply indicates that something will occur and gives no indication of progression of events.
B correctly uses a future perfect, showing that this action will occur in the future and will be completed in the future. This, combined with 'after' shows the progression of events: cases decided -> maybe no court to appeal to.
I'm sure I explained that horribly..