Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
“Aside from considerations of race, religion or constitutionally protected conduct, none of which appear to be involved here, a public employee still assumes the risk, as far as the Constitution is concerned of being discharged for personal or political reasons.” 285 F.Supp. at 662. More importantly, there was a clear holding of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court that affirmed the legality of such patronage firings. In 1971, Pennsylvania transportation workers sought to challenge the dismissals they anticipated under a forthcoming change of administration. AFSCME v. Shapp, 443 Pa. 527, 280 A.2d 375 (1971). Plaintiffs contended that they “should be entitled to notice and a hearing before discharge, and that political affiliation is not a proper or lawful basis or ground for discharge.” )  , as well as in the strong dissents to the
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a case is moot when the parties lack a legally cognizable interest in the outcome
B. holding claim is not cognizable
C. holding claim is cognizable
D. holding a claim for patronage dismissal was legally cognizable
E. holding that claims for negligent mortgage servicing are not legally cognizable under alabama law
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.