mr. rodden has pointed out part of the problem is we don't know what's going on or in the most general terms what's going on. we think it's important that some of the court's opinion relating to the faa be released in redacted form. it's true no other federal court has weighed in on the constitutionality of the faa and no court has found to it to be unconstitutional. that's because the administrations, first the administration, now the obama administration has insulated it from judicial review. they have done that by saying to plaintiffs that the only people that can challenge this surveillance are people that show their own communications have been monitored. that's not information that the administrations release. you're in this situation where the extremely far reaching surveillance statute is essentially beyond the reach of the courts. that is a problem in itself. >> from your description it sounds like one of the issues there's insufficient standing to bring it to federal court. one might be defining standing in such a way you don't have to know something. you don't know by yourself so