What does that have to do with the case being discussed? A judge issued search warrants for information that Google has. Your hyperbole about the government being able to access anyone's information whenever they want isn't helpful to a conversation about privacy.

At anytime a judge could order your information and put a secret gag order. A valid concern. The government seizes domains they deem possible copyright infringement. One judge order could open the floodgates.

> At anytime a judge could order your information

For a judge to issue a warrant, a prosecutor or cop has to swear that they have probable cause to believe that you've committed a specific crime. Judges can't just write warrants arbitrarily. (Of course, this process can be abused, but it's still pretty far from a judge being able to authorize pulling the data of random people.)

The Fourth Amendment says: "... 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."

Why makes probable cause against you in some direct or indirect way?

  You worked here and had access to x
  you fit a profile or someone you know
  you are an enemy of the state

No one needs to break an oath.

There's lots of stuff that nobody should be able to access. Especially things that never should have been stored in the first place.

It's bad that one signature from a judge can unlock all of that.

they didn't access at will but with a warrant, there's a foundamental difference in that, which is the warrant process's guarantee oversight against abuse

beside, it's not a case of the state tracking persons unwittingly, it's persons willingly giving up their data to private companies.