Opinion ID: 4549553
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: First Amendment and Fifth Amendment

Text: Injunctive Relief Claims Against the Official- Capacity Defendants Plaintiffs maintain that it violates the First Amendment’s Religion Clauses and the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment for the Government to target them for surveillance because of their adherence to and practice of 38 The operative complaint alleges as a factual matter that Plaintiffs were surveilled solely because of their religion. We limit our legal discussion to the facts there alleged. 84 FAZAGA V. WALLS Islam. The Government does not challenge the First and Fifth Amendment claims substantively. It argues only that injunctive relief is unavailable and that litigating the claims is not possible without risking the disclosure of state secrets. We have already concluded that injunctive relief, including expungement, is available under the Constitution where there is a substantively viable challenge to government action, see supra Part III.A, and that dismissal because of the state secrets concern was improper because of the availability of the § 1806(f) procedures, see supra Part II. Accordingly, considering only the arguments put forward by the Government, we conclude that the First and Fifth Amendment claims against the official-capacity defendants may go forward.