Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
prescription drug use and Keating’s positive urine test that day. Moreover, once inside 90 Market Street, Lombardo’s flight and Keating’s presence in the upstairs bathroom provided additional justification for the search of the residence. We find the search reasonable. C. The Strip Search of Keating Was Reasonable. We also agree with the District Court that the strip search of Keating was reasonable under the circumstances. The reasonableness of a strip search or visual cavity search is assessed by considering the totality of the circumstances, including “the scope of the particular intrusion, the manner in which it is conducted, the justification for initiating it, and the place in which it is conducted.” See Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 620, 559, 99 S.Ct. 1861, 60 L.Ed,2d 447 (1979) . We reiterate that Keating, as a parolee, had
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that prison officials may conduct visual body cavity searches in a reasonable manner
B. holding probable cause to be required for strip and visual body cavity searches
C. holding unconstitutional blanket jail policy of subjecting all arrestees to strip and visual body cavity searches
D. holding unconstitutional city policy of subjecting all females arrested and detained to strip and visual body cavity searches
E. holding that a visual body cavity search requires probable cause and a search warrant
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.