With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". as “Bivens-type actions based directly on the Constitution.”). The Court in Bush held a Bivens-type action would not lie where a federal statutory scheme provided a remedy for the violation of a particular constitutional right, in that case, the First Amendment right to free speech. Id. at 390, 103 S.Ct. at 2417. The Bivens implied cause of action against federal officers complements the statutory § 1983 cause of action which lies against state or other non-federal government officials. 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988). The deterrent effect provided by Bivens-type, actions works similarly to that provid n of Conway, 127 N.H. 593, 503 A.2d 1385 (1986) (refusing to imply a cause of action when a statutory remedial scheme exists); Corum v. University of North Carolina, 330 N.C. 761, 413 S.E.2d 276 (<HOLDING>) cert. denied, — U.S. -, 113 S.Ct. 493,121

A: holding that in the absence of an adequate state remedy one whose constitutional rights are violated has a direct claim against the state under the state constitution
B: recognizing exception under state constitution
C: recognizing that state agencies which are independent of the state are citizens of the state
D: holding that the state police is a state agency
A.