The prospect of unregulated governmental monitoring will undoubtedly prove disturbing even to those with nothing illicit to hide. Many individuals, including members of unpopular political organizations or journalists with confidential sources, may legitimately wish to avoid disclosure of their personal contacts. See NAACP v. Alabama, 357 U. S. 449, 357 U. S. 463 (1958); Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U. S. 665, 408 U. S. 695 (1972); id. at 408 U. S. 728-734 (STEWART, J., dissenting). Permitting governmental access to telephone records on less than probable cause may thus impede certain forms of political affiliation and journalistic endeavor that are the hallmark of a truly free society. Particularly given the Government’s previous reliance on warrantless telephonic surveillance to trace reporters’ sources and monitor protected political activity,
I am unwilling to insulate use of pen registers from independent judicial review. —from the dissenting opinions in the 1979 scotus decision that was later overturned by a 1988 congressional act.
Monitoring will eventually be used politically (already has I suspect). That has been clear since the Patriot Act was first passed and the scope is greater now. Of course, no one in DC would use this vast power which could keep them in charge indefinitely.