Title is a bit misleading. The court didn't deny access to statute. The court denied access to opinions issued by the FISC. This is still really terrible becaus

Title is a bit misleading. The court didn't deny access to statute. The court denied access to opinions issued by the FISC. This is still really terrible because precedent is, in a way, just as important as statute in determining legal outcomes. But it's a little bit different than what the title of TFA would have you believe. Yes, precedent can in some instances be considered 'law'. But to a non-legal layperson it's not generally referred to as such. Most people when thinking about what the 'law' is think about statute. So it's still terrible, but the article headline is a bit misleading.