With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". at securing the protections of the Fourteenth Amendment,” Florida Prepaid, 119 S.Ct. at 2207, we hold that the defendants cannot assert the Eleventh Amendment as a defense to the plaintiffs’ Equal Pay Act claim. B. The defendants also contend that the district court erred in determining that Congress validly abrogated the States’ Eleventh Amendment immunity under § 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment when it extended the application of Title VII to the States. In our original consideration of this claim on direct appeal, we noted that this Court has already held the extension of Title VII to state employers to be a valid exercise of Congress’ § 5 authority. See Liberies v. County of Cook, 709 F.2d 1122, 1135 (7th Cir.1983); United States v. City of Chicago, 573 F.2d 416, 423 (7th Cir.1978) (<HOLDING>). We then held that the defendants had waived

A: holding that congress extension of title vips protections to public employees was clearly rationally related to and consistent with the letter and spirit of the fourteenth amendment
B: holding that the retaliation provision of title vii is an adequate exercise of congress authority under section 5 of the fourteenth amendment
C: holding that the fourteenth amendment only applies to state action
D: holding the sixth amendment applicable to the states through the fourteenth amendment
A.