Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
that permits us to review the constitutionality of the provision in question. Accordingly, even though Ohms did not challenge the constitutionality of seetion 78-3-31 below, we nonetheless address this argument on appeal. Our analysis of the constitutionality of section 78-3-31 begins with the premise that “statutes stitutionality of a given statute is made, the said statute must be examined to determine if it is unconstitutional, either on its face or as applied. See, e.g., In re Criminal Investigation, 7th Dist. Court No. CS-1, 754 P.2d 633, 640 (Utah 1988); Wells v. Children’s Aid Soc’y of Utah, 681 P.2d 199, 204 (Utah 1984); Ellis v. Social Servs. Dep’t of Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 615 P.2d 1250, 1255 (Utah 1980). The statute at issue in th 116 (Utah 1970) ; accord State v. Green, 793 P.2d 912, 916
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. recognizing right of this court to regulate and discipline members of the bar
B. recognizing that an attorney has a duty of loyalty to his client
C. holding that utah supreme court cannot delegate its duty to discipline an erring attorney to others
D. holding that a general acute care hospital may not delegate its duty to provide physicians for emergency room care because the law imposes a duty on hospital to provide that health care
E. holding that the authority of the supreme court to discipline judges and members of the bar is plenary
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.