Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
for discrimination or retaliation purposes between “termination” and other adverse actions such as “failure to promote” or “denial of transfer.” See Morgan, 536 U.S. at 114, 122 S.Ct. 2061. Nor does — or could— the majority ultimately hinge its decision on the absence of any formal “reinstatement process.” The denial of reinstatement can give rise to a claim if grounded in discriminatory or retaliatory bias, regardless of whether any formal process attends the denial. Indeed, one of the cases cited by the majority in setting out when reinstatement claims might be made, EEOC v. City of Norfolk Police Department, 45 F.3d 80 (4th Cir.1995) (cited ante, at 529-30), establishes that refusal of reinstatement through informal means can be actionable. See Norfolk Police, 45 F.3d at 84-85 . The majority ultimately rests its decision on
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding police department employees opposition to discrimination by police officers against black citizens did not constitute protected activity under title vii
B. holding police officer is a public official
C. holding that police departments failure to discipline an officer can create municipal liability particularly when plaintiffs injuries result from conduct similar to that alleged in prior complaints against the officer
D. holding that where white police officers were customarily reinstated imme diately after criminal charges against them were dropped while an africanamerican officer was required to complete a formal administrative appeal process eeoc can pursue a discrimination claim against the police department for failing to reinstate the africanamerican officer through informal procedures
E. holding that the pittsburgh police department did not illegally terminate an officers hla benefits and that the police department was entitled to a subrogation interest against the officers thirdparty settlement
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.