A statute of the state of East Dakota requires each insurance company that offers burglary insurance policies in the state to charge a uniform rate for such insurance to all of its customers residing within the same county in that state. So long as it complies with this that state. So long as it complies with this requirement, a company is free to charge whatever rate the market will bear for its burglary insurance policies. An insurance company located in the state of East Dakota files suit in federal district court against appropriate East Dakota state officials to challenge this statute on constitutional grounds. The insurance company wishes to charge customers residing within the same county in East Dakota rates for burglary insurance policies that will vary because they would be based on the specific nature of the customer's business, on its precise location, and on its past claims record. In this suit, the court should 
hold the statute unconstitutional, because the statute deprives the insurance company of its liberty or property without due process of law.  hold the statute unconstitutional, because the statute imposes an undue burden on interstate commerce.  hold the statute constitutional, because the statute is a reasonable exercise of the state's police power.  abstain from ruling on the merits of this case until the state courts have had an opportunity to pass on the constitutionality of this state statute.
Question: A statute of the state of East Dakota requires each insurance company that offers burglary insurance policies in the state to charge a uniform rate for such insurance to all of its customers residing within the same county in that state. So long as it complies with this that state. So long as it complies with this requirement, a company is free to charge whatever rate the market will bear for its burglary insurance policies. An insurance company located in the state of East Dakota files suit in federal district court against appropriate East Dakota state officials to challenge this statute on constitutional grounds. The insurance company wishes to charge customers residing within the same county in East Dakota rates for burglary insurance policies that will vary because they would be based on the specific nature of the customer's business, on its precise location, and on its past claims record. In this suit, the court should 
A. hold the statute unconstitutional, because the statute deprives the insurance company of its liberty or property without due process of law. 
B. hold the statute unconstitutional, because the statute imposes an undue burden on interstate commerce. 
C. hold the statute constitutional, because the statute is a reasonable exercise of the state's police power. 
D. abstain from ruling on the merits of this case until the state courts have had an opportunity to pass on the constitutionality of this state statute.
Answer: