Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
presented to the courts of last resort — state and federal— will be resolved on other grounds and not by answering this debatable question about the net impact of different rules of law on freedom of expression by performing artists. A more compelling ground for resolving the issue is that legal constraints protecting freedom of expression are primarily designed as a shield, not a sword. They may be invoked generally in defense of freedom and only rarely to sustain an action for damages. The legal system stands ready to shield freedom against unlawful governmental intrusion, but reluctant to use the sword of damages to vindicate one claim of freedom by striking down another. Cf. NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co., 458 U.S. 886, 920-32, 102 S.Ct. 3409, 3430-36, 73 L.Ed.2d 1215 (1982) . In a system of equal justice, a conception of
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding such damages available where local law silent on issue speculative nature of damages does not preclude recovery
B. holding that law enforcement agents speech which raised the possibility of corruption in a public agency is protected under the first amendment
C. holding that first amendment principles preclude recovery under state law for damages caused by speech or other protected conduct
D. holding first amendment claim requires actual protected conduct
E. holding that retaliatory discharge based solely on protected speech by ones spouse is actionable under the first amendment
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.