Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
which concerns “a whole range of easily identifiable and constitutionally proscribable conduct.” Shepard, 983 P.2d at 4. We therefore cannot agree with Shell’s claim of overbreadth. C. We also are unpersuaded by Shell’s assertion that the court lacks jurisdicti 0 N.E.2d 753, 756 (Ind.1986) (same). In keeping with these decisions and our mandate to regulate the practice of law in Colorado, we construe our ban on the unauthorized practice of law to include the practice of law in Colorado federal courts. It is certainly true that the Colorado federal courts can allow individuals to engage in legal practice in federal courts who would not otherwise be allowed to practice law in Colorado state courts. See Sperry v. Florida ex rel. Fla. Bar, 373 U.S. 379, 83 S.Ct. 1322, 10 L.Ed.2d 428 (1963) . Nevertheless, the Supreme Court made clear in
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding out admission to practice law when not admitted to practice
B. holding that state court could regulate the practice of law in federal courts located in the state
C. holding that ban on unauthorized practice of law did not implicate the first amendment
D. holding that under the supremacy clause a state court could not enforce a prohibition on the unauthorized practice of law against an individual who was permitted to practice law under the rules of a federal court located in the states jurisdiction
E. holding that the unauthorized practice of law constitutes violation of code
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.