Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
440 (1981); Papish v. Bd. of Curators of Univ. of Mo., 410 U.S. 667, 669-70, 93 S.Ct. 1197, 35 L.Ed.2d 618 (1973) (per curiam). Restrictions on student speech do not violate the First Amendment when educators exercise “editorial control over the style and content of student speech” that is “school-sponsored,” provided “their actions are reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical concerns.” Hazelwood Sch. Dist. v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260, 273, 108 S.Ct. 562, 98 L.Ed.2d 592 (1988). Here, Keefe’s speech was off-campus, was not school-sponsored, and cannot be reasonably attributed to the school. Hazelwood’s “reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical concerns” test is therefore inapplicable in this case. See Morse v. Frederick, 551 U.S. 393, 405, 127 S.Ct. 2618, 168 L.Ed.2d 290 (2007) ; Keeton v. Anderson-Wiley, 664 F.3d 865, 882
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that schools failure to take steps to prevent students attempted suicide was not even close to violating this outrageousness standard
B. holding that transfer rule denying eligibility to students transferring from public to private schools did not violate the students rights to due process or equal protection of the laws as provided by the fourteenth amendment
C. holding that schools have no duty under the due process clause to protect students from assaults by other students even where the school knew or should have known of the danger presented
D. holding that hazelwood does not control this case because no one would reasonably believe that a students banner bore the schools imprimatur
E. holding unconstitutional the closing of all the schools in one county
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.