Actually, unilaterally deciding what the constitution means is actually how it works. You don't vote to see if you feel it's unfair - you feel it's fair/unfair

Actually, unilaterally deciding what the constitution means is actually how it works. You don't vote to see if you feel it's unfair - you feel it's fair/unfair and so you vote to express that. The constitution isn't a promise we-the-people made to government, it's how we-the-people define government. Now it's okay that the NSA employees had different opinions, but what's not okay is that when called on their actions they used their interpretation of the constitution not just as a defense, but as a reason to continue. As if we owe the government its rights instead of the other way around. Clearly unconstitutional according to anyone who cares about the will of the people they serve as opposed to the letter of the law.