While the President was once again using his best rhetorical skills to assure the public that the NSA is not really abusing its top-secret surveillance powers, Alex Tabarrok, an economist at George Mason University and co-blogger at Marginal Revolution, was asking: “Is the Fourth Amendment now illegal?”
Tabarrok also proposes adding the following language to the Fourth Amendment:
“Congress shall pass no law abridging the right of the people to encrypt their documents and effects.”
While we are at it, prior probability would amend Article III of the Constitution thus:
“Congress shall not have the power to create secret courts.”
What part of the Constitution would you amend?
prior probability 
I would amend the Constitution to reflect what our actual rights are and not what “they” would like us to believe they are. There are just so many exceptions. The Fourth Amendment alone has more than 10 exceptions. Oh and what is probable cause? What is the definition of unreasonable? So vague.
Those are great points … notice how these exceptions to our rights do not appear in the text of the Constitution; they are simply invented or made-up by judges, who usually side with the government and persons in power … also, I agree that constitutional concepts like “probable cause” or “due process” (and many others) are very vague, thus leading to an inevitable “level of generality” problem when judges try to define the scope of our rights … P.S. — I will blog more on the “level of generality” problem in future posts …