With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". 1 & 241, 105 S.Ct. 3142; College Sav. Bank, — U.S. —, — —, 119 S.Ct. 2219, 2228-29, — L.Ed.2d — (rejecting Parden’s doctrine of constructive consent because it conflicts' with the longstanding requirement that a waiver of a constitutional right must be unequivocally expressed and “altogether voluntary” (quotation marks and citation omitted)). Although this second method of waiver seems to allow looking beyond the text of a state statute or constitution to a state’s conduct in relation to a federal program in order to find a waiver, KSU contends that Edelman and this court’s decision in Johns restrict our analysis to examining only statutory and constitutional text to find a waiver. See Johns, 57 F.3d at 1553 (reading Edelman as requiring that a state may. waiv 407, 1408 (10th Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>). In spite of these holdings, however, this

A: holding that state did not waive eleventh amendment immunity by removing case to federal court
B: holding that new mexico did not waive eleventh amendment immunity by engaging in activities and entering contracts subject to federal regulation
C: holding that state defendant waived eleventh amendment immunity to a federal claim by removing to federal court
D: holding that the new mexico school district and their governing boards are not arms of the state entitled to eleventh amendment immunity
B.