With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". both due process and equal protection challenges to federal statute); Agilar, 779 F.2d at 125-26 (finding “[i]t is surely rational to achieve [the statute’s] goal by increasing penalties for those who sell drugs near schools” and rejecting due process and equal protection challenges); Dixon, 619 F.Supp. at 1400-01 (rejecting due process and equal protection challenges to federal statute); Nieves, 608 F.Supp. at 1149-51 (noting that “[i]t is difficult to imagine a more rational way of keeping drug traffickers out of areas where children are more likely to come into contact with them than to subject them to a risk of stiffer penalties for doing business near school property,” and rejecting due process and equal protection arguments); State v. Burch, 545 So.2d 279, 284 (Fla.App.1989) (<HOLDING>); State v. Rodriguez, 225 N.J.Super. 466, 542

A: holding that florida statute did not constitute an unreasonable exercise of the states police power and rejecting due process and equal protection challenges
B: holding that an exercise by the state of its police power is presumed to be valid when it is challenged under the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment
C: holding that judicial enforcement of arbitration award did not constitute state action triggering due process protection
D: holding that  707b does not violate the equal protection guarantees of the fourteenth and fifth amendments of the united states constitution and rejecting debtors voidforvagueness argument
A.