such a program infringes on "that degree of privacy" that the founders enshrined in the Fourth Amendment. Leon, the first judge to examine an NSA program outside of the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) on behalf of a non-criminal defendant, described the technology used as "almost Orwellian", referring to the George Orwell novel Nineteen Eighty-Four. Leon stated that he had "serious doubts about the efficacy" of the program, because the government was unable to cite "a single instance in which analysis of the NSA's bulk metadata collection actually stopped an imminent attack, or otherwise aided the government in achieving any objective that was time-sensitive." Leon ruled that a 1979 Supreme Court precedent that the NSA often cited as justification for its surveillance, Smith v. Maryland (which established that phone metadata is not subject to the Fourth Amendment), did not apply to the NSA program. He termed the use of telephone metadata in Smith v. Maryland as short-term forward looking capture and that of NSA as long-term historical retrospective analysis. Citing the NSA's vast scope and "the evolving role of phones and technology", Leon's opinion pointed out that the Fourth Amendment needs to adapt to the digital age. In his analysis, Leon rejected the government's argument that the plaintiffs did not have standing to challenge the bulk telephony metadata program. Instead, their fear of being surveilled was not merely speculative. Therefore, the plaintiffs had a substantial likelihood of success on their Fourth Amendment arguments. This was supported by a leaked FISC order stating that Verizon had been ordered to provide customer communication data and business records on a regular basis. Thus, the NSA surveillance constituted a search of each person's data. which in turn required a warrant per the Fourth Amendment. Although Leon did not find any evidence that plaintiffs' data in particular was being analyzed, he declared that he had reason to believe that everyone's metadata was being analyzed due to the NSA's own descriptions of its programs. In Leon's words, "Because the Government can use daily metadata collection to engage in repetitive, surreptitious surveillance of a citizen's private goings on, the NSA database implicates the Fourth Amendment each time a government official monitors it." Thus, the NSA surveillance program was declared unconstitutional. Leon dismissed some portions of Klayman's complaints due to lack of evidence or standing, including allegations of the surveillance of foreign nationals via the PRISM program,