1ST Amdt - NSA Litigation in 9th Cir.

From the Gov't's brief: 

An FBI Special Agent in Charge certified in each NSL that the information sought was relevant to an authorized investigation to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities and that any investigation of a United States person was not conducted solely upon the basis of activities protected by the First Amendment.

...

In imposing nondisclosure requirements on the recipients of specified NSLs, Congress was aware of potential First Amendment concerns and therefore included numerous safeguards. Those safeguards, especially when construed as the Second Circuit did in Doe, exceed the safeguards previously found to meet constitutional standards with respect to analogous nondisclosure requirements (including those related to grand jury secrecy, classified national security information, judicial disciplinary proceedings, and secret criminal investigations) and to otherwise meet constitutional requirements, especially given the unquestionably compelling Government interest in the integrity and efficacy of its counterterrorism and counterintelligence investigations. 

...
The question is whether the statute should be entirely struck down, despite its constitutional operation here and thousands of times over the past five years, because it can conceivably be interpreted as not including all of the safeguards addressed in Doe and implemented by the Government. The district court’s facial invalidation of the statute on this basis was not only incorrect but also represents an extreme intrusion into the legislative realm, contrary to clear instructions from the Supreme Court.
...
The Nondisclosure Requirementsin the Three NSLs at Issue Here are Narrowly Tailored to Serve a Compelling Government Interest.