Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
upon the independent justification. Contrary to the majority’s position, there is no body of law under article I, section 7 directing that any pretextual motive on the part of the officer invalidates a traffic stop based upon probable cause that a traffic infraction has been committed. Turning first, however, to other flaws in the majority opinion, the majority misstates the issue before the court, claiming that the State asks this court to approve the use of pretext to justify a warrantless seizure. Majority at 352. The State without question has not asked this court to do any such thing. The State briefed this case under the Fourth Amendment and particularly relied upon the Supreme Court’s decision in Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806, 116 S. Ct. 1769, 135 L. Ed. 2d 89 (1996) . The State did not ask for a holding that
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a traffic stop is reasonable under the fourth amendment when police have probable cause to believe a traffic infraction has occurred
B. holding that the courts determination of whether an officer had probable cause for an arrest is an independent and objective determination and an officers own subjective reason for the arrest is irrelevant
C. holding that an officer may order a passenger out of a vehicle during a stop for a traffic infraction
D. holding that under the fourth amendment the motive of the officer when stopping a vehicle for a minor traffic infraction whether subjective or objective is completely irrelevant
E. holding that motive of officers is generally irrelevant to fourth amendment analysis
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.