This caps off some pretty amazing reasoning.<p>Earlier, the government insisted that simply collecting information in their databases was not a 4th ammendment violation, because the actual 'search' only occured when they _search_ the database, not when they collect and put in their database.<p>(I think maybe they even defined 'collect' so it somehow only applied when they did a search, not when they actually collected?)<p>Now they:<p>> <i>...strongly rejected suggestions by the panel that a court authorise searches for Americans’ information inside the 702 databases. “If you have to go back to court every time you look at the information in your custody, you can imagine that would be quite burdensome,” deputy assistant attorney general Brad Wiegmann told the board.</i><p>> <i>De argued that once the Fisa court permits the collection annually, analysts ought to be free to comb through it, and stated that there were sufficient privacy safeguards for Americans after collection and querying had occurred. “That information is at the government’s disposal to review in the first instance,” De said.</i><p>Combine them both, and, well, you see where you get.