Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
Export Clause does not contain that affirmative requirement, the court cannot construe the clause as the full and express waiver of sovereign immunity necessary to allow prejudgment interest. C. Fifth Amendment Taking Plaintiffs argue that the imposition of the HMT on exports was a taking under the Fifth Amendment and, therefore, the traditional rule against interest does not apply. The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment guarantees that private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation. See U.S. Const, amend. V. A Fifth Amendment takings claim requires a two-step analysis. First, Plaintiff must establish that it possesses a compensable property interest. See, e.g., Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council, 505 U.S. 1003, 1014 (1992); , 876 (9th Cir. 1991) ; Coleman v. C.I.R., 791 F.2d 68, 70 (7th Cir.
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that probation does not constitute a sentence
B. holding that a purely financial exaction does not constitute a taking
C. holding that bodily injury does not include purely emotional injuries
D. holding that overflights can constitute a taking
E. holding that the failure to completely disentangle the parties financial affairs does not constitute an abuse of discretion
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.