Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
four claims against the Individual Defendants in their official capacities, including one constitutional claim and three statutory claims under Title II of the ADA, § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Insofar as Plaintiff requests prospective injunctive relief, all of these claims fit squarely within the Ex parte Young exception and are not barred by the Eleventh Amendment. The Ex parte Young doctrine ensures the protection of individuals’ federal rights by allowing suits for prospective injunctive relief against state officials in their official capacity. It is beyond dispute that Ex parte Young actions may be maintained for violations of Title II of the ADA, § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and 42 U.S.C. § 1988. See Harris v. Mills, 572 F.3d 66, 72 (2d Cir.2009) ; Dube v. State Univ. of New York, 900 F.2d
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that in a suit against state officials in their official capacities monetary relief unlike prospective injunctive relief is generally barred by the eleventh amendment
B. holding that title ii ada suits and rehabilitation act suits for prospective injunctive relief may be brought under ex parte young against state officers in their official capacities
C. holding suits against state officials for prospective injunctive relief are permissible because they are in effect suits against the officials in their individual capacities
D. holding that punitive damages may not be awarded  in suits brought under  202 of the ada and  504 of the rehabilitation act
E. holding that eleventh amendment does not bar suits for prospective injunctive relief against state officials in their official capacity
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.