Because the Supreme Court has ruled that the prosecution in

a) that they can appeal to when their cases are
I think "when" should be replaced with "whenever"

b) to which to appeal after their cases have been
Seems okay.

c) for appealing if their case has been
should be appeal to

d) to which they can appeal if their case is
should be more than one case (plaintiffs in such cases)

e) that their cases can appeal, if they have been
should be appeal to

B.

I belive A, although I know its sounds too wordy..

I reckon B can't be right as it uses have been

I think it is A. Wordy but seems the best option.

A. actually it can be. maybe correct
B. still verbous and unclear
C. wrong tense and unclear
D. clear, concise ..but i don't know if we can say: fear to which...maybe incorrect
E. wrong tense and unclear

The question is poorly pasted to the forum ... the correct question stem is:

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.

a)
b) to which to appeal after their cases have been
c) for appealing if their case has been
d) to which they can appeal if their case is
e) that their cases can appeal, if they have been

The OA is B but I dont understand whats wrong with D.

D has an 'if...then' construction ... and since the tense of the verb in the THEN clause is WILL HAVE...its acceptable to have IS in the IF clause...

B is unnecessarily complicating the sentence using past participle...

Can somebody explain it more clearly?

BTW check the post here for OE..
https://gmatclub.com/blog/2011/07/idioms ... -together/

cannot think of B as OA.. and the link does not provide great explanation between A and B.

B uses have been decided. have been - present participle indicates that the case is still ongoing.

D uses is decided-simple past. I get the error with single tense plantiffs-plural/is-singular.

But, have been decided erroneously indicates that the case decisions are ongoing?

How is B the right answer?

I dont think have been decided says that the cases are still going on -present participle indicates ongoing action, or ongoing effect of that action.
Thus, have been decided here is implying the ongoing nature of the effect of the action - that is the decision. till a further appeal is made and decided, this ongoing effect - the decision - continues, right?
thus the use of have been is correct here.

IMO A. All other options change the meaning of the sentence.

+1 B chronological is correct use with present perfect here.
_________________

+1 B. It mantains the chronologoical sequence. "when" in (a) is ackward

I will go with B

But what is the OA?

I go with A...How can B be right???