Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
concept of implied-consent laws that impose civil penalties and eviden-tiary consequences on motorists who refuse to comply . .. and nothing we say here should be read to cast doubt on them."). 14 4 Wayne R. LaFave et al., Search & Seizure: A Treatise on the Fourth Amendment, § 8.2(1) at 164-65 (5th ed. 2012). 15 The Supreme Court of Georgia has explained: "To hold that the legislature could nonetheless pass laws stating that a person 'impliedly' consents to searches under certain circumstances where a search would otherwise be unlawful would be to condone an unconstitutional bypassing of the Fourth Amendment." Cooper v. State, 587 S.E.2d 605, 612 (Ga. 2003) (quoting Hannoy v. State, 789 N.E.2d 977, 987 (Ind. App. 2003)). 16 Aviles v. State, 443 S.W.3d 291, 294 (Tex. Ct. App. 2014) . 17 The Birchfield Court noted that "[t]here
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. recognizing that consent is an exception to the warrant requirement and that voluntariness of consent depends on the totality of the circumstances
B. holding that the implied consent law allows law enforcement officers to obtain blood in circumstances in which a warrant or actual consent may otherwise be required
C. holding that implied consent and blood draw statutes are not permissible exceptions to the warrant requirement and stating that to hold otherwise flies in the face of mcneelys repeated mandate that courts must consider the totality of the circumstances of each case
D. holding that independent of the implied consent law the fourth amendment requires an arrestees consent to be voluntary to justify a warrantless blood draw
E. holding that the implied consent statutes are irrelevant when the defendant gives actual consent to a blood or breath test
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.