Looks like a ruling over standing, not the law itself.
It is possible that the monitoring of the target's conversations with his or her attorney would provide grounds for a claim of standing on the part of the attorney. Such an attorney would certainly have a stronger evidentiary basis for establishing standing than do respondents in the present case.
The justices said that those filing the lawsuit had no standing.
I wish judges across America would follow this same logic when radical environmental groups file their silly lawsuits......these environmentalists have no standing either in the overwhelming majority of their lawsuits.