In this task, you will be shown a prompt from a judicial decision and multiple holding statements derived from citations following text in a legal decision. Holdings represent the governing legal rule when the law is applied to a particular set of facts. There are five answer choices for each citing text. The correct answer is the holding statement that corresponds to the citing text. The four incorrect answers are other holding statements. You should find the correct option. There is a <HOLDING> token in the position of the citing text prompt where the holding statement was extracted.

under 1983 has not been established. [ 31.] In addition, [t]o state a claim under 42 USC 1985(3), a plaintiff must plead 1) the existence of a conspiracy; 2) a purpose of depriving a person or class of persons of equal protection of the laws; 3) an act in the furtherance of the alleged conspiracy; and 4) an injury to person or property or the deprivation of a right or privilege granted to a United States citizen. Additionally, a plaintiff must show "some racial, or perhaps otherwise class-based, invidiously discriminatory animus behind the conspirator's action." Biby v. Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska at Lincoln, 338 FSupp2d 1063, 1074 (D.Neb.2004) (internal citations omitted) (emphasis added). See also Federer v. Gephardt, 363 F.3d 754, 758 (8th Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>). [ 32.] On appeal, the parents do not assert,
Holding statements: (A) holding that lprs are entitled to the protection of the equal protection clause (B) holding that a claim under the equal protection section of section 19853 requires proof of classbased animus (C) holding that equal protection requires that state legislative districts be roughly equal in population (D) holding that defendant had qualified immunity under section 19853 claim where underlying claim failed as a matter of law (E) holding that doctrine does not violate equal protection
(B)