Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
regardless of the nature of the relief sought.” (internal quotation omitted)). Moreover, the state is not a “person” within the meaning of section 1983. Will v. Michigan Dep’t of State Police, 491 U.S. 58, 71, 109 S.Ct. 2304, 105 L.Ed.2d 45 (1989). In an attempt to elude the sovereign immunity bar, plaintiffs essentially ask this Court to order two legislative leaders, in their official capacities, to appropriate additional funds for the Clean Elections Fund. Case law makes clear that a suit against a state official in his or her official capacity, which is essentially a suit against the state itself, may be barred by the Eleventh Amendment regardless of whether injunctive or monetary relief is sought. See Kentucky v. Graham, 473 U.S. 159, 165, 105 S.Ct. 3099, 87 L.Ed.2d 114 (1985) ; Pennhurst, 465 U.S. at 101, 104 S.Ct. 900.
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that suit against county sheriff in his official capacity was suit against county
B. holding that a suit against a state official in his or her official capacity is not a suit against the official but rather is a suit against the officials office
C. holding that an official capacity suit should be treated as a suit against the entity
D. holding that a damages suit against a state officer in his official capacity was barred because it was functionally a suit against the state
E. holding that a suit against a state official in his or her official capacity is a suit against the state itself and not cognizable under  1983
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.