1. Lawyers and justice systems generally lag societal opinion, not lead it. 2. s/societal opinion/technology/ as well. 3. As a result of the above, the most e

1. Lawyers and justice systems generally lag societal opinion, not lead it. 2. s/societal opinion/technology/ as well. 3. As a result of the above, the most effective and expedient way to get policy changes is almost never going to be through court, no matter how right one may be. In this case, the numbers are not really heavily on their side, and they have trouble doing anything but challenging it in court (see http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/05/29/what-americans-think-about-nsa-surveillance-national-security-and-privacy/ http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/05/29/what-america... vs http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/nsa-snooping/survey-americans-divided-government-surveillance-n372276 http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/nsa-snooping/survey-america... vs ... ). 3. While I love them, the EFF has often been wrong over the years about how far they will get with various lawsuits. They are an advocacy organization, and so one should take their predictions with a grain of salt. (This is the part where the article says "Experts felt a shift was equally imminent. .... "I think it's impossible to tell which case will be the one that does it, but I believe that, ultimately, the Supreme Court will have to step in and decide the constitutionality of some of the NSA's practices," Mark Rumold, an attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told Ars last year.") The vast majority of non-advocacy experts i'm aware of did not think most of these lawsuits would get as far as the EFF did, simply because the odds are highly against them. In short, none of this is either surprising, nor is it likely to change anytime soon.