Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
Court Intervention 'Unit, following the issuance of a Protective Order removing the children to Polinsky by the Juvenile Court and the subsequent return of the children to the Mann home. Pis. Opp. and Resp. to Defs. Separate Statement of Undisputed Material Facts 3, ECF No. 203. As such, Monge and Solis played no role in the initial removal of the Mann children. Moreover, Monge and Solis are entitled to absolute immunity with respect to the actions they took following the court order. See Tamas v. Dep’t of Soc. & Health Servs., 630 F.3d 833, 842 (9th Cir.2010) (noting that “[ajbsolute immunity is extended to state officials, such as social workers, when they are performing quasi-prosecutorial and quasi-judicial functions” such as the execution of court orders); Mabe, 237 F.3d at 1109 ; see also Engebretson v. Mahoney, 724 F.3d
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that social workers are entitled to absolute immunity when prosecuting child delinquency petitions
B. holding that social workers enjoy absolute quasijudicial immunity when making postadjudication custody decisions pursuant to a valid court order  quotation omitted
C. holding that state prosecutors enjoy absolute immunity for the initiation and pursuit of a criminal prosecution
D. holding that absolute immunity cannot attach to a quasijudicial officer if his actions are clearly and completely outside the scope of his jurisdiction
E. holding that officials charged with the duty of executing a facially valid court order enjoy absolute immunity
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.