[calibas]

Yep, that's the exact "loophole" I mentioned in my original comment!

The government can now partner with private businesses to effectively bypass the Fourth Amendment.

[otterley]

Yes, that is true. But that is not a violation, which was in the first clause of your original claim. It's an end-run.

If it were a violation, Courts could enjoin it. But since it's not a violation, there's nothing to enjoin.

[y-c-o-m-b]

You had me up until now. Turns out your whole point is arguing semantics? You're arguing just to argue and not providing anything of substance on this point. As another person said, this isn't a court.

[calibas]

If it's not clear already, I'm not a lawyer and I'm not using strict legal definitions.

[Loughla]

Congratulations. By needling and carving at semantics, you win the argument! Two more Internet points for you!

It's almost like HN isn't a court and the OP was expressing their opinion that this should be illegal. . . Not relying on specific semantics for the current state of affairs?