Constitutionality of Verizon Record Seizure

Both the Washington Times and Fox TV News report that the cell phone company Verizon has been ordered by the federal government to supply to the government the details of all its telephone calls.
         More specifically, the Washington Times says the following:
1. The order states says Verizon “shall produce to the National Security Agency (NSA) upon service of this Order, and continue production on an ongoing daily basis thereafter for the duration of this Order … an electronic copy of the following tangible things: all call detail records or ‘telephony metadata’ created by Verizon for communications (i) between the United States and abroad; or (ii) wholly within the United States, including local telephone calls.”
2. The order was signed by Judge Roger Vinson of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.
3. The order is in force until July 19, according to the court order. A British newspaper said the order was granted to the FBI on April 25.

It is apparent that the Obama administration is collecting phone records of millions of citizens in bulk, whether or not they are suspected of wrongdoing.

The question is whether this action is constitutional.

The IV th Amendment to the Constitution says:
    "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

  Wikipedia says, "Like many other areas of American law, the Fourth Amendment finds its roots in English legal doctrine".

The Fourth Amendment is part of the Bill of Rights was adopted in 1791. In the amendment, "papers" clearly means written documents, such as letters, leases, contracts, handwritten notes, diagrams, etc.. While we still have such handwritten papers, the technology has been expanded, such that electronic documents, including lists of telephone numbers, are clearly included.

In the case of Entick v. Carrington, which occurred in 1765 and obviously known to the founding fathers of the Constitution, Charles Pratt, 1st Earl Camden ruled that the search and seizure was unlawful, as the warrant authorized the seizure of all of Entick's papers, not just the criminal ones and the warrant lacked probable cause to even justify the search.

Thus, case history clearly shows that the search and seizure of phone records from Verizon, involving personal "papers" (phone records) of millions of people was clearly unconstitutional.

The United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) is a U.S. federal court  established by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA). The FISC oversees requests for surveillance warrants against suspected foreign intelligence agents inside the United States by federal law enforcement agencies (primarily the F.B.I.).

           I call on Congress to address this matter with the Obama Administration. Congress can challenge Judge Vinson's order at the Court of Appeals, and if necessary take it to the Supreme Court.