With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". checkpoint. He asserts that the defendants unconstitutionally retaliated against his exercise of that right when they arrested him for doing so. The district court dismissed this claim after finding it was reasonable to restrict filming at an airport security checkpoint, a nonpublic forum. The defendants add that they are entitled to qualified immunity because they reasonably believed they had probable cause to arrest Mocek, and at the time of the arrest, it was not clearly established that plaintiffs could maintain retaliation claims for arrests supported by probable cause. We agree. To state a First Amendment retaliation claim, a plaintiff must allege “(1) he was engaged in constitutionally protected activity, (2) the government’s actions caused him injury that w (3d Cir.2010) (<HOLDING>); McCormick v. City of Lawrence, 130 Fed.Appx.

A: holding there was no clearly established right to videotape police officers during a traffic stop
B: holding police officers making a traffic stop could order passengers out of the stopped car
C: holding that police officer may order passengers to remain in vehicle with hands up during traffic stop
D: holding that police officers may stop vehicles when they observe minor traffic violations
A.