Simon, we had more to do with it than I like. The Constitution was not written for lawyers - it was written for citizens.

I'm dangerously wading in late and out of context, but at the risk of self promotion I will refer to my post following the Obamacare decision tiltled, "This Lawyer Says - Stop Listening to Lawyers!" In sum, I think the Supreme Court is an equal part of the Founders' genius, but the Court's inside baseball over the last several decades has not been a credit to the institution or the profession. (Sorry for no link - can't get it to work on my phone.)

Lookit, the point here is not that you must accept this surveillance program as fait accompli. The point is only that if you expect the courts to find it to be beyond the Fourth Amendment, there's a good chance you will be disappointed. The road to the result you want is political. Get loud. Go to Tea Party meetings. Propose legislation. Work to elect people who will put a stop to it. Demand accountability from those already in office. Count me as your first supporter. That's your play.

Roberto, don't hate the player - hate the game.

John, how does my point about Roe not make any sense? Are you saying that the Fourth Amendment played no role in Griswold and later cases?

Just to add a but of context unconnected from the present topic (for what it's worth, I have serious concerns about how restrained the government may have been in this particular program): The Fourth Amendment's primary focus was on your security in your home and in "the curtilage" around it from warrantless government intrusion. Its protection against government searches is narrower than we typically hope. Even in 1791, if you availed yourself of commercially available products and conveyances (e.g., newspaper subscriptions, wagons for hire, public roads, and so on), you would have had no reasonable expectation of privacy in your activities in the large sphere of life beyond your home. Same goes today for your use of modern telephony in general. Also, arguments to read more into the Fourth Amendment have a spotty history: recall that Fourth Amendment protections were a key part of the grab bag of rights that the Supreme Court used to conjure up their "emanations" and "penumbras" in the Sixties, which we regularly and rightly deride. Those notions led to Roe v. Wade. In sum, if you have a problem with these searches (and you should), the Fourth will only get you so far.

X-Ray vision.

Precisely.

My understanding is that, yes, it does (any criminal procedure mavens are welcome to call me on this if I'm wrong).  We are not Switzerland or the Caymans, which apply statutory protections to financial information (query whether these states consider financial privacy to be a policy matter or something that arises from individual liberty; my guess is that it's the former).

No.  The only question at issue in these cases is whether the government can obtain access to the information at issue without a warrant pursuant to the Fourth Amendment.  The Fourth Amendment only restrains government, not private actors.  If, for instance, your phone company released your telephone records to another private citizen (say, a representative of Media Matters), you would have a whole slew of common law and statutory causes of action to include in your very strong and very justified lawsuit against the phone company and the recipient of the information.

Nah - I've always considered that a healthy perspective around here.

Thanks for the assist, Salvatore. Good to see someone is at their desk!

Misthiocracy - You ask a good question and Professor Yoo can provide you a better citation since I don't have anything at hand that is going to assist my failing memory. However, I expect he relies on longstanding Supreme Court authority regarding the warrantless use of pen registers in criminal investigations

I vote we all get together and set a time to simultaneously call the White House switchboard from our cell phones. Have the word go viral and get millions of people to do it. Thirty minutes after we overwhelm the White House lines, we do the same to IRS headquarters. Thirty minutes later we all dial IRS Cincinnati. We can call it the "Hour of Power."

Leslie Watkins nailed it - Frasier is not in the top ten, ergo this entire project was illegitimate and should be ignored.

And I must pay for all of this with increased Social Security and Medicare taxes? Thank you, but no.