Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
operates a CTH I facility, the kind of setting DDSN has determined would constitute the least restrictive environment for Doe. We therefore affirm, but on different grounds, the district court’s dismissal of Doe’s freedom of choice claim. See Eisenberg v. Wachovia Bank, N.A., 301 F.3d 220, 222 (4th Cir.2002) (observing that we “can affirm on any basis fairly supported by the record”). C. Because Doe’s freedom of choice claim fails as matter of law, we do not find it necessary to decide whether § 1396a(a)(23) confers a private right on individuals that may be enforced under § 1983. Even assuming Doe may proceed under § 1983 to enforce § 1396a(a)(23), Appellees are entitled to summary judgment on Doe’s claim. Cf. Burks v. Lasker, 441 U.S. 471, 475-76, 99 S.Ct. 1831, 60 L.Ed.2d 404 (1979) . IV. For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding it is a question of fact
B. recognizing that the critical question is whether any present violation exists
C. recognizing that whether a duty exists is a question of law for the courts
D. holding that generally the question of waiver and estoppel is a question of fact
E. holding that the question whether a cause of action exists is not a question of jurisdiction and therefore may be assumed without being decided
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.