Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
that there is an impediment to marriage, then the clerk may not rely on the applicant’s statement that there is no impediment. “This is true regardless of the type of impediment involved, i.e., whether the impediment is based on age, consanguinity or affinity, marital status, or same-gender status of applicants who reside and intend to continue to reside in other states.” In sum, the plaintiffs have failed to establish that (1) they, compared with others similarly situated, were selectively treated; and that (2) such selective treatment was based on impermissible considerations such as race, religion, intent to inhibit or punish the exercise of a constitutional right, or malicious or bad faith intent to injure a person. Daddario v. Cape Cod Commission, 56 Mass.App.Ct. 764, 773 (2002) , citing Rubinovitz v. Rogato, 60 F.3d 906,
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a claim of inadvertent errors in administration of election procedure without some allegation of intentional discriminatory conduct did not properly allege a denial of equal protection of the laws
B. holding that denial of development permit to mine sand and gravel on thirtytwo acres of property did not deny owner equal protection of laws
C. holding that segregation in public education is a denial of equal protection of the laws
D. holding transfer eligibility rule did not deny the student equal protection of the laws or procedural or substantive due process under the fourteenth amendment
E. holding a similar peer review confidentiality statute did not deny the plaintiffs equal protection
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.