Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
by the Supreme Court of the United States from all such final decisions.” Id. It is in light of this historic and statutory backdrop that we must consider the nature of our review of the Supreme Court of the Virgin Islands’ decisions. At the outset, we identify three possible standards of review that we might apply to a decision of the Virgin Islands Supreme Court. First, we might define our role as that of a “super-Supreme Court,” with powers of review equivalent to that of a state Supreme Court reviewing the decision of an intermediary state appellate court. Second, our role might be framed as equivalent to that of the United States Supreme Court when it reviews decisions of a state Supreme Court. See, e.g., Oregon v. Guzek, 546 U.S. 517, 521, 126 S.Ct. 1226, 163 L.Ed.2d 1112 (2006) ; Richfield Oil Corp. v. State Bd. of
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that we review agency determinations of law de novo
B. holding federal courts are bound by state court determinations of state law
C. holding that supreme court possesses jurisdiction to review statecourt determinations that rest upon federal law
D. holding that failure to cite federal law does not mean that state court decision was contrary to established federal law state court need not even be aware of supreme court precedents so long as neither the reasoning nor the result of the statecourt decision contradicts them
E. holding that the supreme court may review statecourt judgments that rest on state law when the state court felt compelled by what it understood to be federal constitutional considerations to construe and apply its own law in the manner it did
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.