Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
harm in order to further the military goals of that organization. Id. at 323-24. Judge Williams focused instead on those who (1) "attempt!] or engage!] in belligerent acts against the United States, either domestically or in a foreign combat zone; (2) on behalf of an enemy force.” Id. at 285. 32 . See generally id. at 230-31 (Motz, J., concurring in the judgment); but see id. at 314-22 (Wilkinson, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part) (concluding that law-of-war principles must account for recent developments in how warfare is conducted). 33 . Id. at 231 (emphasis added). . 34 . al-Marri v. Pucciarelli, 555 U.S. 1066, 129 S.Ct. 680, 172 L.Ed.2d 649 (2008). 35 . al-Marri v. Spagone, 555 U.S. 1220, 129 S.Ct. 1545, 173 L.Ed.2d 671. 36 . See Rasul, 542 U.S. at 484, 124 S.Ct. 2686 ; Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, P.L. 109-148,
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that federal courts have statutory habeas jurisdiction over petitions filed by guantanamo detainees
B. holding section 1252a2c precludes habeas jurisdiction
C. holding that statutory habeas jurisdiction extended to guantanamo
D. holding that the statutes 30 day provision is mandatory and may not be extended and dicta that it may not be extended by release from incarceration
E. holding alien detained as enemy combatant at guantanamo bay has no constitutional right to writ of habeas corpus
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.