It seems that the reason for the ACLU's request being declined is jurisprudence, which is a weak argument. The court did not directly explain why it is unreason

It seems that the reason for the ACLU's request being declined is jurisprudence, which is a weak argument. The court did not directly explain why it is unreasonable to request such information (claiming national security doesn't necessarily mean it is so). Since 2007 and 2008 many things have come to light, including how deep their operations go and which companies (in part) are being used for surveillance. Therefore more evidence has come to light and the ACLU is pretty much just being dismissed in my opinion without justification or at least without a valid reason (even if it is justified). Legally, I think the court is "sound," but that does not mean they could not throw the ACLU a bone by just releasing the most basic of their law interpretations (since we already know them).