With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Welfare, to the Honorable William D. Ford, Chairman, Subcommittee on Postsecondary Education, Committee on Education, House of Representatives (Feb. 11, 1980), reprinted at J.A. 388-89 (explaining HEW’s reasoning for not presenting the interpretation to Congress). We find EIA’s argument with respect to GEPA to be without merit. 12 . The Eleventh Amendment, though without express language to this effect, has been interpreted to bar suits brought by a citizen against his own state. See Bragg v. W. Va. Coal Ass'n, 248 F.3d 275, 291 (4th Cir.2001)(citing Litman v. George Mason Univ., 186 F.3d 544, 549 (4th Cir.1999); Hans v. Louisiana, 134 U.S. 1, 10-15, 10 S.Ct. 504, 33 L.Ed. 842 (1890)). 13 . See, e.g., Seminole Tribe v. Florida, 517 U.S. 44, 59, 116 S.Ct. 1114, 134 L.Ed.2d 252 (1996) (<HOLDING>); Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123, 28 S.Ct. 441,

A: holding that congress had no power under article i to abrogate state sovereign immunity
B: holding that congress could abrogate the eleventh amendment pursuant to the commerce clause
C: holding that congress exceeded its authority under  5 of the fourteenth amendment in attempting to abrogate the states eleventh amendment immunity in adea suits
D: holding that congress may abrogate a states immunity pursuant to its enforcement power under  5 of the fourteenth amendment
D.