[Biggirl]

The Guardian UK article is correct.

[rarestia]

I'm not saying the article was incorrect in any way. I'm saying that no judgement was made against the NSA that stops it from violating the 4th amendment. If you read the article, there are judicial hedges EVERYWHERE in the ruling:

Judge Richard Leon declared that the mass collection of metadata probably violates the fourth amendment

In Monday’s ruling, the judge concluded that the pair's constitutional challenge was likely to be successful

Leon’s opinion contained stern and repeated warnings that he was inclined to rule that the metadata collection performed by the NSA – and defended vigorously by the NSA director Keith Alexander on CBS on Sunday night – was unconstitutional.

This was a trial designed to test the fitness of the accusations against the government. This was not a legally-binding trial forcing the NSA to stop collecting data, and even when that trial comes about, the NSA won't stop. It might put in place some "feel good" measures to make the public think it's turning a new leaf, but signal intelligence remains the most lucrative form of intelligence. They'll just be careful to avoid any more inconvenient intelligence leaks.