Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
of Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520, 534, 113 S.Ct. 2217, 124 L.Ed.2d 472 (1993) (“Facial neutrality is not determinative .... The [Free Exercise] Clause forbids subtle departures from neutrality and covert suppression of particular religious beliefs.” (internal quotation marks and citations omitted)). In reaching this conclusion we do not suggest that “every religious sect or group within a prison— however few in number — must have identical facilities or personnel.” Cruz v. Beto, 405 U.S. 319, 322 n. 2, 92 S.Ct. 1079, 31 L.Ed.2d 263 (1972). But under Turner, neutrality must be ensured, or its absence sufficiently explained in light of a legitimate penologoical interest, for summary judgment to be appropriate. See Thornburgh v. Abbott, 490 U.S. 401, 415-16, 109 S.Ct. 1874, 104 L.Ed.2d 459 (1989) ; see also Hammer v. Ashcroft, 512 F.3d 961,
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. recognizing that it serves no discernible public purpose to draw distinctions between clinical social work and other mental health professions with regard to the need for confidentiality
B. holding that prison regulations impinging on prisoners constitutional rights are only valid where reasonably related to legitimate penological interests
C. holding that turners neutrality requirement allows a prison policy to draw distinctions so long as those distinctions flow from the governments legitimate penological interest
D. holding that prison administration may infringe upon prisoners first amendment rights as long as the infringement is reasonably related to legitimate penological interest
E. holding a publisheronly rule was constitutional because prison administrators are accorded deference and rule was reasonably related to the penological interest of maintaining internal prison security
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.