I know, but I also know judges often rule based on "common sense" and "intent" of harm, regardless of the letter of the law. Surely the fact that documents say

I know, but I also know judges often rule based on "common sense" and "intent" of harm, regardless of the letter of the law. Surely the fact that documents say that millions of people have been spied upon with such a program means that the judge should allow a case by an organization like EFF or HRW go through, even if the employees of that organization weren't personally affected by it? There should be a "for public interest" clause somewhere, or at least as an unwritten rule.