A capture rate of 100% is unreasonable. By definition, every document is grabbed and analyzed. It is unreasonable because there is no reason for the seizure of the documents. There must be a reason for the necessary warrant in order to capture of the documents.
The government's behavior in that manner is completely contrary to the protections laid out in the 4th Amendment. Anyone who disagrees with this is wrong, full stop. As there is no war declared, there can no national security argument to be made to override the Constitution. Until we repeal the 4th, a capture rate of 100% is unconstitutional because there is no specific warrant process. The judiciary may not exempt themselves form the warrant process, nor may the Congress pass a law declaring warrants unnecessary - the Constitution overrides both these actions (or inactions).
Thank you for calling me out about the moron part. But respectfully, I disagree with you. I will not be kind, nor civil to someone who disagrees with me on this point of Constitutional interpretation. Anyone who trades freedom for security (in peacetime) is wrong - morally, ethically, and practically. As there is no declaration of war, these Government actions are illegal and the support of these actions traitorous. The people who enacted these warrantless programs should be tried, found guilty, and then places in jail / banished / put to death / pardoned (pardoning would be best, much as Ford pardoned Nixon).