There's a large difference though between what governments could presumably buy from ad trackers or data warehouses and what they can get by intercepting unencrypted web traffic at the ISP level.
I think to OP's point, if we are worried about government wrongdoing we should pass laws against government wrongdoing. It really doesn't matter what the private industry does or doesn't do if the government still has the right to take it.
I am not afraid of my data being used against me to sell products. I am afraid of the government abusing their monopoly on violence. The first seems like misdirection.
I see your point and the appeal of pushing for toughness on the worst side with leniency on the lighter issues.
It just seems irrealistic to have basically a "don't be evil" policy on gov side while letting gorrilla size businesses roam free.
For instance we already have a very bad time dealing with VISA/Mastercard policies that straight dictate what businesses are allowed to thrive online. VISA/MC duopoly is not the gov, yet it has arguably more power on the online cultural landscape. And any gov making their life easier can have them implicitely return the favor in some way would be basically untraceable (the gov might not even need to ask for anything. VISA/MC would just apply changes in line with the gov.'s stated policies)
User surveillance is the same, you can't have unruled gigantic entities allowed to do whatever they want, with the gov limited to a small set. That chinese wall is just bound to leak.
Technically we already have protection under the 4th amendment, to me this falls squarely under "papers, and effects" and is an unreasonable search. It seems that the court doesn't agree though considering the current state of things.
