With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". factfinder could determine that intentional discrimination occurred. Defendants contend that Plaintiffs generalized statistics are insufficient to support Plaintiffs claims of intentional discrimination. As the Supreme Court has noted, while statistical evidence may allow the District Court to “determine ... that the (racial) composition of defendant’s labor force is itself reflective of restrictive or exclusionary practices .... such general determinations, while helpful, may not be in and of themselves controlling as to an individualized hiring decision, particularly in the presence of an otherwise justifiable reason for refusing to hire.” McDonnell Douglas, 411 U.S. at 805 n. 19, 93 S.Ct. 1817 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). In 59 F.2d 310, 330 (5th Cir.1977) (<HOLDING>). Further, even if Plaintiff had evidence of

A: holding that plaintiffs evidence of statistical disparities in hiring promotion and compensation was sufficient to support claim of intentional discrimination where the employment decisions were based on completely subjective criteria
B: holding that disparities in compensation were due to a number of permissible factors including seniority experience and performance
C: holding plaintiffs had stated a claim for intentional discrimination under the ada and  504
D: holding that disparate impact analysis may be applied to subjective employment practices in employment discrimination actions
A.