While I get your point, the constitution is fundamentally _about_ hamstringing the government in ways you're fully allowed to privately contract away. It's abo

While I get your point, the constitution is fundamentally _about_ hamstringing the government in ways you're fully allowed to privately contract away. It's about saying the government may pass any and all laws within these guidelines -- that's why you can shout fire at the top of a mountain and nobody cares, but in a privately owned theater it's not a free-speech issue. Or something like that - point is, if it wasn't doing anything wrong, why was it obscuring that fact through classification and NDA's until now - when as you say - it's public data that the government would (in your theory of constitutional law) be entitled to purchase?