What was the court's decision in International Union Johnson Controls the case in which the defendant was sued for sex discrimination because of a broad exclusion of women from jobs exposing them to lead in order to guard against dangers to the fetus of any pregnant employee?
A. That the company was justified in implementing the fetal-protection policy because unconceived fetuses would be considered third parties whose safety is essential.
B. That the company was justified in implementing the policy because of the employment at will rule.
C. That the company was not justified in implementing the policy because of the absence of evidence at the trial court level establishing the levet at which a fetus is at risk from such exposure.
D. That the company was not justified in implementing the policy because decisions about the welfare of future children are left to the parents.