On September 4, 2019, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia issued a Memorandum Opinion and Order in the Elhady v. Kable case. In this case, the plaintiffs are “twenty-three United States citizens who claim that because of their inclusion in the federal government’s Terrorist Screening Database (‘TSDB’), referred to colloquially as ‘the Watchlist,’ they have suffered a range of adverse consequences without a constitutionally adequate remedy.” The Court held that the Department of Homeland Security Traveler Redress Inquiry Program ('DHS TRIP'), “in its current form, provides no notice concerning whether a person has been included or remains in the TSDB, what criteria was applied in making that determination, or the evidence used to determine a person’s TSDB status. Nor does the DHS TRIP process provide the Plaintiffs with an opportunity to rebut the evidence relied upon to assign them TSDB status.” The Court concluded that “[g]iven the consequences that issue out of a person’s inclusion in the TSDB, . . . DHS TRIP, as it currently applies to an inquiry or challenge concerning inclusion in the TSDB, does not provide to a United States citizen a constitutionally adequate remedy under the Due Process Clause.” The Court ordered that the “TSDB fails to provide constitutionally sufficient procedural due process, and thereby also violates the Administrative Procedures Act” and stated that Plaintiffs are entitled to a judgment as a matter of law on Counts I and III of their Amended Complaint. The Court also granted the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment to the extent that the Court concluded that the “DHS TRIP process currently applicable to any inquiries concerning the TSDB does not satisfy the Due Process Clause” (also denying the Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment). The Court directed the parties to submit supplemental briefing regarding what they contend should be the appropriate remedy.