Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
6 . A plaintiff may prove discrimination through either direct or circumstantial evidence. Ramsey v. City & County of Denver, 907 F.2d 1004, 1007-08 (10th Cir.1990). Proof of "an existing policy which itself constitutes discrimination” would constitute direct evidence. Id. at 1008. But contrary to Mr. Jones’s argument, the record does not contain direct evidence of a discriminatory policy. In order to be "direct,” evidence must prove “the existence of a fact in issue without inference or presumption.” Hall v. U.S. Dep’t of Labor, 476 F.3d 847, 854 (10th Cir.2007) (quotation omitted). For example, an employer's express adoption of a discriminatory policy constitutes direct evidence. See Trans World. Airlines, Inc. v. Thurston, 469 U.S. 111, 121, 105 S.Ct. 613, 83 L.Ed.2d 523 (1985) . To prove the existence of a discriminatory
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that an employers policy requiring female employees to make larger pension fund contributions than male employees was discriminatory on its face in violation of title vii
B. holding that a complaint must contain enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face
C. recognizing that whether an employee uses the mcdonnell douglas approach or relies on direct or circumstantial evidence of discriminatory intent the employee must counter the employers legitimate nondiscriminatory reason for its adverse action in such a manner as to create a genuine issue as to discriminatory intent
D. holding section 61137 unconstitutional on its face
E. holding employers admitted policy discriminatory on its face
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.