My understanding is that in the vast majority of investigations law enforcement will be satisfied in learning only who you're talking to, i.e. "just metadata" is fine, and dangerous.
It seems reasonable. Even those who are sloppy with their opsec probably do not detail the entirety of the plan via digital mechanisms. Being able to identify likely collaborators is probably sufficient to infer some specifics of an activity.
"The map is not the territory" ensures that bias and mistakes are inextricable from the entire AI project. I don't want to get all Jaron Lanier about it, but they're fundamental terms in the vocabulary of simulated intelligence.
Federal regulations hold the force and effect of law. The listed agencies (and all others) all have thousands of pages of rules and regulations that, if violated, are federal crimes that come with serious financial penalties as well as jail time.
That Congress has given some measure of its Constitutional lawmaking ability to federal agencies is not a partisan statement and is not debated as a matter of fact, the question is just whether you think it's okay / legal or not.
