Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
States v. Garcia, 672 F.2d 1349, 1357 (11th Cir. 1982) (concluding that the “point of origin has no bearing on the reasonableness of a [border] search so long as a border crossing has been established”). Here, the Government does not dispute that D.E. did not cross the border and was not in the process of crossing the border when his vehicle was searched. C. Reasonable Suspicion Was Required for the Search of D.E.’s vehicle When CBP officials seek to search an item or person on the basis of general “contact with the border area,” without evidence that the item or person has crossed the border or is in the process of crossing, reasonable suspicion is required. United States v. Glaziou, 402 F.2d 8, 13-14 (2d Cir. 1968), cert denied, 393 U.S. 1121, 89 S.Ct. 999, 22 L.Ed.2d 126 (1969) ; United States v. McGlone, 394 F.2d 75, 78
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that certain police stops of limited duration that are reasonably related in scope to the justification for their initiation are legal
B. holding that lprs are entitled to full procedural due process at the border even when returning to the united states
C. holding states are not persons for the purposes of section 1983
D. holding that persons who have direct contact with a border area or whose movements are reasonably related to the border area are not subject to search absent suspicion
E. holding that claims are related if they involve a common core of facts or they are based on related legal theories
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.