Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
1567, 1573 (11th Cir.1992) (explaining that a facial challenge is proper because the regulation “affects the enjoyment of freedoms which the Constitution guarantees and subjects the exercise of First Amendment freedoms to licensing requirements”) (internal citations and quotation marks omitted). Because Frandsen and Morris challenge the permit regulation, which is a prior restraint on speech, on grounds that it fails to provide constitutionally required procedural safeguards, the general rule set forth in Adler does not apply to their facial challenge. A prior restraint on expression exists when the government can deny access to a forum for expression before the expression occurs. See Ward v. Rock Against Racism, 491 U.S. 781, 795 n. 5, 109 S.Ct. 2746, 2756 n. 5, 105 L.Ed.2d 661 (1989) . The regulation presently at issue clearly
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a state may not exercise a prior restraint on publishing a newspaper
B. holding that strict scrutiny applies to a prior restraint enforcing a contentbased restriction on speech in a traditional public forum
C. holding that a regulation was not a prior restraint because it did not authorize suppression of speech in advance of its expression
D. holding that plaintiff did not have standing to challenge the permit process where it could not show that it would ever be genuinely threatened by an unconstitutional prior restraint in this case
E. holding that prior restraint analysis applies to commercial speech but that the general health claim regulation 21 cfr  10114 was sufficiently welldefined to survive prior restraint analysis
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.