According to the Supreme Court, the government was working within the 4th Amendment

Like po said, the court has not ruled on the merits of this case or any similar to it. It has simply ruled that the plaintiffs lack standing, which is true because the administration has locked away all of the information that would be necessary to determine who does and does not have standing. Permitting it to do so completely eliminates the court’s ability to act as a check on the executive. Not good, even if you happen to like the short term result.

It’s not about changing any amendment. One doesn’t have to if the right SCOTUS decision comes down.

If SCOTUS says something is constitutional, then it’s constitutional, and it doesn’t matter what you think.

And there you have it: the “living document” theory is alive and well on both sides of the aisle.

The surest path to hell on earth is the idea that you can leave the language intact, yet change the underlying definitions. There will always be new cases that test the limits of any given provision, but it is our responsibility, through the legislature, to clarify the language when SCOTUS gets it wrong. That is why it matters what we think.

It’s not about changing any amendment. One doesn’t have to if the right SCOTUS decision comes down.

If SCOTUS says something is constitutional, then it’s constitutional, and it doesn’t matter what you think.

The Unitary Executive declared that the program was secret, even though it had admitted its existence and the broad details of how it operated. It lied, again. And because the Judiciary typically give deference to the Executive Branch, even this Unitary Executive was able to say one thing, while doing another, and get the decision it wanted / needed.

Thus, a majority of the court decided the plaintiffs didn’t have standing. No decision was made on the legality of the purported actions being complained of.

if you don’t like the 4th Amendment, or any other Amendment to the US Constitution, change it or go somewhere else. Me, I’m tired of y’all dragging us through the gutter of anything goes so long as I feel safe (forgot whether or not anything this administration has done has even made us safe).

According to the Supreme Court, the government was working within the 4th Amendment…. and the ACLU can go piss up a rope.

We should perish the very idea that any of these true, dyed in the wool patriots would ever think of subverting the law to sustain their political agenda.

But Panday, that’s the genius of your plan: if there’s no law, they can’t possibly subvert it! We’ll just elect all the guys with white hats and trust them to round up all the bad guys!

All satire aside, go right ahead and be suspicious of everyone. That’s totally fine by me. Just make sure you do it within the confines of the 4th amendment.

As the leftists say, “Hate speech isn’t free speech”. I guess suspicious speech isn’t either. I am thoroughly abashed.