What is the test for determining whether a plaintiff has a right to privacy and First Amendment rights?

Because White arose on the pleadings, we necessarily assumed the truth of plaintiff's allegations and intimated no view regarding the ultimate question, i.e., whether plaintiff's state and federal constitutional rights had been violated by the challenged conduct of law enforcement authorities. (White v. Davis, supra, 13 Cal.3d at p. 776, 120 Cal.Rptr. 94, 533 P.2d 222.) Focusing on plaintiffs' rights to academic freedom and freedom of expression, we held the facts as alleged revealed government conduct "likely to pose a substantial restraint upon the exercise of First Amendment rights" and observed that "the challenged surveillance activities can only be sustained if defendant can demonstrate a 'compelling' state interest which justifies the resultant deterrence of First Amendment rights and which cannot be served by alternative means less intrusive on fundamental rights." (Id. at p. 772, 120 Cal.Rptr. 94, 533 P.2d 222.)

Commenting on the state constitutional right to privacy, we characterized the law enforcement conduct alleged in the complaint as inherently "intrusive," noting defendant would have the opportunity to "contest any of the allegations of the complaint as well as to designate the compelling governmental interests upon which they rely...." (White v. Davis, supra, 13 Cal.3d at p. 776, 120 Cal.Rptr. 94, 533 P.2d 222.)