Brad, a California resident, uses his popular blog to make false and disparaging comments about a dog breeding business incorporated and headquartered in the state of Illinois, Dog Delight, Inc. ("Dog Delight"). Brad knows that Dog Delight's business is located in Illinois, that the false and disparaging comments he posts online from his home in California will be seen by other clients of Dog Delight including in Illinois, and that the comments will likely harm Dog Delight by damaging its reputation and decreasing its revenues by scaring away potential clients.If Dog Delight sues Brad, alleging a state law defamation claim (a claim that Brad's words wrongfully harmed Dog Delight's business reputation), which of the following would likely be true:

Group of answer choices

Dog Delight cannot sue Brad because Brad is an individual exercising his rights to free speech.

Brad cannot be sued in Illinois because he has never traveled to that state and made his false and damaging comments while he was in California.

Only federal courts will have personal jurisdiction over Brad.

Courts in Illinois and California will have personal jurisdiction over Brad.

Can you please leave an explanation? Thank you!