The Constitution requires a search warrant to be issued by a judge before search (wiretaps) and seizure.
The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land that the executive is sworn to uphold.
Nobody has said the terrorists shouldn't be wiretapped. The issue is solely about obtaining a warrant from a judge. Why is that such a big deal? All the executive needs to wiretap is a warrant from a judge.
This is the 4th amendment:
" The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
That is THE LAW, in the United States Constitution. You are UNAMERICAN if you do not defend and uphold this amendment.
Your premise is all wrong. What NSA is doing is not "wiretapping". You need to study this matter more carefully because NSA does not "wiretap, but the FBI does wiretap and they get warrents to do so. The FISA Court covers both NSA and FBI. The FISA court makes some fine distinctions based on the laws. But the ACLU keeps using the BIG LIE saying "NSA wiretaps". The FISA Court has reviewed what NSA is doing and says it IS prudent and legal. The ACLU is trying scare the public and intimidate the courts by pitting one court against the rulings of the other. The ACLU has its own agenda - the defeat of America.