Doesn't it make sense that the court tell the government to not only shut down the service to retrieve the data, but also keep it offline until they have made m

Doesn't it make sense that the court tell the government to not only shut down the service to retrieve the data, but also keep it offline until they have made modifications to allow the court to inspect it? It would only be reasonable that such programs be, at a minimum, prepared for court oversight. If preservation of evidence cannot be guaranteed then the program should not be used to enforce the law. I find it particularly troubling that this system was not only never envisioned to be used to pursue a warrant from the courts, but also designed to make it impossible to do so by making the act of proving the legality of the evidence collected by making a chain-of-custody analysis deliberately conflict with national security interests. I believe this is clearly analogous to a defensive weapon which is designed to kill enemies of the country, but although it regularly also kills civilians the government refuses to allow it to be inspected (and potentially fixed) using the excuse that turning it off would harm even more civilians. I unequivocally support the defence and enforcement of our national security, political and economic interests. However, I find it entirely unreasonable to sacrifice the freedoms from which our nation sprung, political and economic systems included, in order to preserve it.