Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
of the interstate nexus element of the crime. Glover contends that, even though the court gave the jury a limiting instruction, ie., that they were free to disregard the expert’s conclusion, the jury did not feel free to consider the evidence on their own, and were forced to either accept or reject the expert’s conclusion. Glover contends that Agent Zim-mer’s testimony should have been limited to p use expert testimony to prove the interstate nexus element of a weapons charge brought pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 922. See, e.g., United States v. Corey, 207 F.3d 84, 88-89 (1st Cir.2000) (noting that an expert may testify that a weapon was manufactured in one state and sold in another, and thus to state their opinion as to that issue); United States v. Privett, 68 F.3d 101, 104 (5th Cir.1995) , cert. denied, 517 U.S. 1226, 116 S.Ct. 1862,
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. recognizing that  the interstate nexus requirement is satisfied by proof of a probable or potential impact on interstate commerce
B. holding expert testimony provided no evidence as to causation since testimony was not based upon reasonable medical probability
C. recognizing scarborough holding that commerce nexus satisfied upon showing that possessed firearm had traveled at some time in interstate commerce
D. holding after lopez that the interstate nexus element of the hobbs act still requires the government to show only a minimal connection to interstate commerce
E. holding that pjroof of the interstate nexus to the firearm may be based upon expert testimony
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.