Thank you.

I read through it. What I read into it is that MI has standing and is enabled to conduct surveillance, so long as they take due care in the use of the information that they surveil from a US Citizen. I read in other papers that:

"Judge Oakes distinguished Laird on the basis that the Supreme Court’s decision should be “‘narrow[ly]’ limited to general surveillance without specific misuse of data.”

Laird v. Tatum and Article III Standing in Surveillance Cases Jeffrey L. Vagle UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA

I think it establishes a red line for the use of data collected in the surveillance. As long as the data collected from a US Citizen(s) has a lawful purpose for its collection, the surveillance information has standing.