What was in dispute here wasn't that some information was subpoenaed following proper procedure, but that the judge held that the "proper procedure" in this case was the procedure for public information in which there isn't a "reasonable expectation of privacy", while Twitter was arguing that the subpoena was requiring them to disclose things that were not in fact public information.

From a PR point of view, Twitter did the right thing. They executed their right to challenge the subpoena. Now they have to begrudgingly hand over the data. It makes it look like they'll fight for their users, even though there's clearly nothing they can do.

What about the rest of the information associated with a Twitter account?

You really find it odd that the government can force company X to turn over your ip address, name, email and other such information?

The concern over growing fascism comes from warrantless government behavior. This, on the other hand, seems completely within the realm of government acting properly.

People keep on pointing out to you that the judge applied a standard meant for public information to a request for non-public information.