It all depends on who gets to define “unreasonable”.
With today’s computerized technological world, “privacy” is kind of a moving target, and is likely to remain so for a good while.
The 4th Amendment kind of got thrown out the window with PRISM
Actually, every single time the NSA has ever prosecuted anyone in court, the evidence from prism has been suppressed. You know when this happens, because every single time Justice Scalia turns into the stay-puft marshmallow man and rampages around DC.
Scalia really quite often sides with defendants in 4th Amendment cases. For example, in Maryland v. King (2013), he vigorously opposed the Court’s holding that police could legally extract a cheek swab DNA sample from someone incident to arrest. Or that same year in Prado Navarette v. California, where the Court ruled that a single uncorroborated anonymous tip is enough to make a car stop “reasonable” as long as the tip correctly identifies the vehicle and its location. Scalia called that one “freedom-destroying”.
As we’re about to find out, it didn’t exactly stick.
Well, not to go off on too great a tangent, but the Federalists who wrote and publicized the Constitution were very much opposed to the Bill of Rights, but were essentially forced to promise one to gain ratification by less enthusiastic states. The Bill of Rights was demanded by an entirely different set of founders than the Constitution.