The 4th amendment

[Ms. Toad]

108. Then, please use your limitations to explain

why wiretapping requires a warrant.

And - the question on release of information is whether the order pursuant to which the information was gathered violated the constitution. While it may have had the color of law, permitting the provider to release it within the bounds of the contract - the order itself may have been (and I believe it was) unconstitutional.

Now that we have proof of specific targets with standing to test that (which the Supreme Court said was merely speculative when it dismissed the case earlier this year), we will finally be able to have the law reviewed to determine whether it was constitutional or not.

And - your final statement is legal nonsense - since that reasoning would also mean a wiretap, generally accomplished by access to the telephone provider's lines (not the target's property), would never never have required a warrant, either. And we both know it does.