With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". disrupts the goal of the NVRA — to streamline the registration process. See Majority Opinion, pp. 400-01. Although the NVRA seeks to simplify and harmonize registration procedures, the statute also identifies “protecting] the integrity of the electoral process” and “enhancing] the participation of eligible citizens as voters in elections for Federal office” as guiding purposes of the statute. 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg(b) (emphasis added). Even under the majority’s complementary analysis conducted pursuant to Siebold and Foster v. Love, 522 U.S. 67, 118 S.Ct. 464, 139 L.Ed:2d 369 (1997), see Majority Opinion, p. 394, Arizona’s proof-of-citizenship procedure complements— rather than conflicts with — these important purposes. See Siebold, 100 U.S. at 384; Foster, 522 U.S. at 74, 118 S.Ct. 464 (<HOLDING>). The stated harmonious purposes are not served

A: holding the state law claims were not preempted
B: holding that a state election law is preempted only to the extent that it conflicts with federal law
C: holding to the effect that section 341 fifth as impliedly amended by title vii preempts state law to the extent but only to the extent that it conflicts
D: holding outside of the context of title vii or the adea that section 24 fifth preempts state law to the extent but only to the extent that it conflicts
B.