Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
allow [the Court] to depart downward.” The court then went on to consider the government’s motion for an upward departure, a motion the court granted. In the final analysis, despite the government’s attempts to paint them as innocuous, the district court’s comments are pointed and reflect a belief that the court lacked discretion to depart downward. This, however, is error. In effect, the district court inverted the rule. The district court appeared to assume that, absent the Guidelines’ express reference to a particular factor, the court lacked authority to depart downward on that basis; the rule, however, is the opposite — unless the Guidelines specifically proscribe consideration of the factor, then the factor is to be considered. This rule was articulated plainly and (9th Cir.1996). Clearly, then, because previous incarceration
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that defendants status as a deportable alien could be considered by the district court at sentencing
B. holding that deportable alien status is not a ground for departing downward
C. holding that the district court could consider increased sentence severity resulting from deportable alien status
D. recognizing that district court may take into account adverse impact on incarceration caused by status as deportable alien
E. holding that departure based on deportable alien status was prohibited
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.