Because it hugely effects what we should do about it.

If I don't like the actions the NSA is taking, and those actions are legal, then I should push for laws making it illegal.

If I don't like the actions the NSA is taking, and those actions are illegal, then I should push for punishment of those violating the laws, better oversight, &c.

Pushing for laws banning already illegal behavior is a waste of time. Pushing for (criminal) punishment of people who weren't breaking any laws is not appropriate.

You are right that the present illegality or legality should not substantially affect our assessments of what the laws should be (except perhaps through a weak preference for the status quo motivated out of conservative principles - more ways to break things than fix them).

> Just because you can do something, doesn't mean it's a good idea

Just because you can do something _legally_, doesn't mean it's a good idea.

Just because you can do something _illegally_, doesn't mean it's a bad idea.

FTFY

You make a good point, but subjective standards are harder to enforce than objective standards (laws). We subjectively decide what should and shouldn't be done, and then we objectively codify that in law to make prosecution straightforward and fair. The law is a tool.

That's the theory. We're fucked when the govt turns around and subjectively interprets objective law to do whatever the fuck they want.

Sure. But really, I meant why does the NSA or other orgs need to do everything up to the letter of the law (regardless of the suggestion that they went beyond the law)? Just because the speed limit is 70, doesn't mean you have to go 70.

Its because a bureaucracy illegally doing something wrong is a magnitude of order worse than a bureaucracy legally doing something wrong.

"Why do we keep talking about the legality of what is being done?"

Probably because of the widespread belief that laws are handed down from the heavens. The idea that the law could be wrong is nearly heresy.

Not at all. Laws are frequently struck down by courts for being unconstitutional, sometimes after many years of being in force.

Laws are struck down, but we do not frequently free people who were convicted of violating them, nor do we frequently repay fines, nor do we compensate people for the damage done by bad laws.

IANAL, but most legal systems hold people liable for the law at the time in question, not the law right now.