I think he’s using novelty in the sense of uniqueness of the case.
That’s what I was hoping. As in, someone is finally filing on our government ignoring the Constitution.
That may be what he means, probably is. What is horribly wrong here is that aside from the technology in use, there's nothing unique about violations of the Constitution.
Technology or so called threats to "national security" do not abrogate the Constitution.
This is a clear message to the Stalinists in DC that they can delay and obfuscate as long as possible (which will be a very long time) while they bring sufficient and appropriate pressure to bear on the next level of the courts, to which they will be appealing.
In my layman's (very opinionated) opinion, the government will eventually win the appeal. One way or the other. This judge covered his conscience, while screwing us and the Constitution.