Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
the Due Process Clause because it failed to provide any protection for the parent’s “fundamental constitutional right to make decisions concerning the rearing of her own daughter.” Id. at 70, 120 S.Ct. at 2062, 147 L.Ed.2d at 59. The Court then cited with approval state statutes and court decisions that, unlike the Washington statute, protect that fundamental right. See, e.g., Cal. Fam.Code § 3104(e) (West 1994) (rebuttable presumption that grandparent visitation not in child’s best interest if parents agree otherwise); Me.Rev.Stat. Ann., tit. 19A, § 1803(3) (West 1998) (authorizing visitation if in child’s best interest and does not significantly interfere with parent-child relationship or “parent’s rightful authority over the child”); Hoff v. Berg, 595 N.W.2d 285, 291-92 (N.D.1999) . Summing up, the Court described the
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that for a compelling state interest to exist justifying an order of visitation over the objection of a childs parents a court must find an actual harm to the childs health or welfare without such visitation construing virginias statute as requiring such a finding
B. holding visitation statute unconstitutional because it disregards presumption favoring parental decisionmaking forcing parents to prove visitation not in childs best interest
C. holding conclusory statements in visitation dispute were not adequate to support awarding visitation rights
D. holding troxel not controlling where states supreme court previously held rational basis review sufficient based on minimal intrusion of grandparent visitation and other parental protections afforded by visitation statute
E. holding that uncertainty regarding amount of visitation ordered is fatal to the validity of a trial courts visitation  award
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.