Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
to challenge section 14-107 both facially and as applied. The defendants dispute the plaintiffs’ standing to raise a facial challenge, but argue that the plaintiffs’ claims fail in any event. As discussed below, we conclude that section 14-107 was constitutionally applied to the plaintiffs despite reservations about the constitutionality of the statute were it subject to a facial vagueness challenge. The central question presented by this appeal therefore is whether the plaintiffs are permitted to bring their void-for-vagueness challenge facially. We conclude that they are not. A. Facial and As-Applied Vagueness Challenges Facial challenges are generally disfavored. See, e.g., Wash. State Grange v. Wash. State Republican Party, 552 U.S. 442, 450, 128 S.Ct. 1184, 170 L.Ed.2d 151 (2008) ; Farrell v. Burke, 449 F.3d 470, 494 (2d
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that courts should exercise judicial restraint and decide asapplied challenges before facial challenges
B. recognizing that courts should exercise judicial restraint in a facial challenge
C. holding that a state may not exercise a prior restraint on publishing a newspaper
D. holding that in deciding on a facial constitutional challenge it is improper to consider only limited hypothetical applications
E. holding that exhaustion of arbitration procedure is not necessary before the district court could consider a facial constitutional challenge
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.