Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
of electronic communications. See, e. g., 18 U. S. C. § 2511(l)(e) (placing restrictions upon “any person who . . . intentionally discloses, or endeavors to disclose, to any other person the contents of any wire, oral, or electronic commu nication, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through the interception of a wire, oral, or electronic communication”). The Court correctly observes that these are “content-neutral law[s] of general applicability" which serve recognized interests of the “highest order”: “the interest in individual privacy and ... in fostering private speech.” Ante, at 526, 518. It nonetheless subjects these laws to the strict scrutiny normally reserved for governmental attempts to censor different viewpoints or ideas. See ante, at 532  (quoting Smith v. Daily Mail Publishing Co.,
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that attorneys admission to an element of the offense in the petitioners presence at a deportation hearing was binding on the petitioners
B. holding that the denial of petitioners appeal to the bia would have put a reasonable person in the petitioners position on notice that something was wrong with his attorneys preparation for the removal hearing
C. recognizing conflict between interests of the highest order
D. holding that petitioners have not established the requisite  need    of the highest order
E. holding that a docket entry in the orphans court need not summarize the contents of the order but need only show that an order was filed
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.