If you can convince people that you have the law on your side, you will have done exceptionally grave damage to the Constitution of the United States. Exigent circumstances have always in the past been very narrowly defined and limited to a single home, address, building, or structure. That did not apply in this case, and the general search was yet another of the many governmental overreaches that have created the situations that the courts have used to define that line that may not be crossed.
Can you cite a source? If that is the case, go file a lawsuit - you will win. But from what I read exigent circumstances is pretty broadly defined and used.
Here's but one legal definition of exigent action during emergency conditions:
'Those circumstances that would cause a reasonable person to believe that entry (or other relevant prompt action) was necessary to prevent physical harm to the officers or other persons, the destruction of relevant evidence, the escape of a suspect, or some other consequence improperly frustrating legitimate law enforcement efforts.'