they can probably circumvent that by not admitting they found someone that way. if it’s not admitted in evidence, just claim they used a person to track them down via good old shoeleather ,surveillance and paid informants.
who would be the wiser?
Setting aside for a moment the things dishonest people can accomplish when they decide to lie under oath, the supreme court's decision in this case is very good news for the people of the United States and for the 4th Amendment. It certainly beats the alternative.
The defense attorney, when he asks for surveillance logs and photos and to depose the investigators.