Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
693, 142 L.Ed.2d 728 (1999) (Lopez II). Moreover, “[a] State, whether partially or fully covered, has authority to submit any voting change on behalf of its covered jurisdictions and political subunits.” 28 C.F.R. § 51.23. At least one district court has recognized that “Congress intended that either the legislative body that enacted the legislation or the executive body that was responsible for administering the legislation would be responsible for obtaining preclearance.” Bone Shirt v. Hazeltine, 200 F.Supp.2d 1150, 1156 (D.S.D.2002) Under the facts alleged in this case, Secretary Detzner is an appropriate defendant for a Section 5 enforcement action because his office adopted and is responsible for administrating the Database Matching Program. See Bone Shirt, 200 F.Supp.2d at 1156 ; see also Haith v. Martin, 618 F.Supp. 410
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a state may not condition voting in state elections on payment of a tax
B. recognizing the immunity of counties unless an action is authorized by the legislature
C. holding that an action naming a state entity as a defendant did not constitute an action against the state because the state entity was sued in its capacity as receiver
D. holding that the declaratory judgment act is remedial only and the party seeking declaratory relief must have an underlying cause of action
E. holding that ujnder the plain meaning of the voting rights act the state of south dakota is an entity that must secure preclearance from the attorney general or bring a declaratory judgment action for review of a law passed by the state legislature that impacts voting in covered counties
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.