With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". S.Ct. 695, 172 L.Ed.2d 496 (2009);Hudson v. Michigan, 547 U.S. 586, 594-99, 126 S.Ct. 2159, 165 L.Ed.2d 56 (2006). Here, that task is simple. The deterrence benefit of suppressing the evidence will “ensure that an occupant’s right to privacy [in his home] is protected, and that his ... dignity [will be] preserved.” See United States v. Thompson, 667 F.Supp.2d 758, 768 (S.D. Ohio 2009). These twin concerns will grow more important, not less, as immigration plays an increasingly central and vitriolic role in our public discourse. The Court, therefore, finds great deterrence benefit in ensuring that law-enforcement officers know the bounds of their authority under the Fourth Amendment and federal immigration law. See United States v. Toledo, 615 F.Supp.2d 453, 464 n.5 (S.D.W. Va. 2009) (<HOLDING>). Suppressing the tainted evidence in this case

A: holding that deterrence benefits are clear in criminal cases involving immigration law given congressionally mandated restrictions on lawenforcement power
B: holding that although wade hearing may be constitutionally mandated under certain circumstances it is not mandated in all cases
C: recognizing that generally pennsylvania applies decisions involving changes in the law in civil cases retrospectively le to cases pending on appeal
D: recognizing due consideration to be given attorney general decisions especially in cases involving tpia
A.