Even the right wing Heritage Organization doesn’t make such a claim.

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/02/facts-about-the-national-defense-authorization-act-and-military-detention-of-us-citizens

As to the government using the information against me only on a “criminal matter,” according to the NDAA, which Obama signed last Dec. 31, 2012, I can be “disappeared” at his order alone, never to be heard from again — no charges, no trial, nothing.

— John Seiler

The 4th Amendment protects you from UNREASONABLE search and seizure of your person, home, and personal effects. That arguably would not include records that you do not yourself own or have any property interest in, such as those held by your cell phone company. Since you do not own, possess, or control your cell phone records, it would be difficult to see how you possess standing over their seizure pursuant to a lawfully issued warrant for their contents by a federal court.

If the police break down your door in the middle of the night and violate your 4th amendment rights, your available relief is two-fold: Any evidence they discover and attempt to use against you in a criminal matter can be suppressed by the court because of the violation. You may be able to make a 1983 Civil Rights claim if you can demonstrate that the police actions were clearly unsupported by law, but absent proof of perjury by the public officers seeking the warrant from the court, that would be a very long shot claim.

Your scenario about the police breaking down your door “just for practice” doesn’t fit within the realm of reality, and clearly does not apply to the NSA activities in question.

But your claim of “public” ownership still doesn’t justify the Orwellian spying and snooping that you ProgBots seem addicted to. The 4th Amendment wasn’t repealed by the Federal Communications Act, although it did take a big junk out of the 1st Amendment, much to your demented satisfaction, I’m sure. Your claim that government regulation of the airwaves negates any expectation of privacy by users is without legal foundation and ridiculous on it’s face. Please quote me a law professor, any law professor, who asserts such nonsense, if you can.

Furthermore, your claim that one would have to be arrested, prosecuted or incarcerated pursuant to this outrage before having a legitimate civil rights claim is just plain stupid. As an example, if the police break down your door in the middle of the night and ransack your home just as a training exercise and without any probable cause or warrant, your “logic” would suggest that unless they arrest and prosecute you, no 4th amendment violation occurred. That’s not just crazy, it’s CRAZY STUPID.

WHEN THE GOVERNMENT INDISCRIMINATELY SPIES ON US WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE OR A WARRANT SPECIFICALLY NAMING THE PLACE TO BE SEARCHED, THE REASON FOR THE SEARCH AND THE CRIME OF WHICH WE ARE SUSPECTED, THAT IS A VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEY CHOOSE TO PROSECUTE YOU OR NOT. AND THAT IS STILL TRUE NOTWITHSTANDING ALL OF THE TYRANNICAL LEGAL CHICANERY TO THE CONTRARY.

That’s just plain idiocy.

I presume that also applies to your land line, as they too are licensed by the PUC?

Even then, unless the government attempts to use the information you claim was taken in violation of the 4th Amendment against you in a criminal matter putting your personal liberty in jeopardy, you have no legal standing to challenge such a data collection.