Given the task definition and input, reply with output. 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. You should write an incorrect option. Even though there exist multiple wrong answers, we only need a single wrong answer. There is a <HOLDING> token in the position of the citing text prompt where the holding statement was extracted.

qualified immunity from those claims, but arrive at that conclusion by a different route. Determining whether an officer had reasonable suspicion to conduct an investigatory stop can be a tricky proposition, particularly when one of the factors motivating the stop was, as in this case, the race of the suspects. Race is of little value in distinguishing one suspect from others, particularly where everyone in the pool of possible suspects is of the same race. See United States v. Montero-Camargo, 208 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir.2000) (en banc) (observing that where most people who transverse a checkpoint are His panic, the fact that a particular person transversing it is Hispanic is of little value in establishing reasonable suspicion); Morgan v. Woessner, 997 F.2d 1244, 1254 (9th Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>). But race is a trait that, when combined with
Holding statements: (A) holding that a tip may provide the reasonable suspicion necessary to justify an investigatory stop (B) holding that a tip to look out for a black person without more does not give rise to reasonable suspicion to stop anyone (C) holding that an anonymous tip that a person is carrying a gun without any corroborating evidence did not provide reasonable suspicion of criminal wrongdoing justifying the officers stop and frisk of that person (D) holding that an officers reasonable mistake of law can give rise to the reasonable suspicion necessary to justify a traffic stop under the fourth amendment (E) holding that a mere anonymous tip that a person is carrying a gun without any corroborating evidence does not provide a reasonable suspicion of criminal wrongdoing justifying the officers stop and frisk of that person
holding that a tip may provide the reasonable suspicion necessary to justify an investigatory stop