Well, yeah. But you have a right to be tried by a jury of your peers... who probably won't understand crypto. (The "drugs are bad... except coffee and cigarettes and high fructose corn syrup" propaganda caught on pretty well, so you are probably stuck there. But there is no "strong cryptography is bad" rhetoric out there, and it will be hard to argue for -- the opposite is "the government is trying to steal your credit card number".)

Anyway, the whole point of the Constitution was to allow people to do things that the government didn't want them to do. Using strong cryptography is the modern way to for one to "be secure in their persons, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures".

Finally, it seems that this round of laws is directed at service providers that store encrypted messages; the government wants you to be able to read everything passing through your network. Of course, you do not control the P2P network that your movies and phone calls pass through, so this law has limited effect. Even then, if end users provide their own encryption, that's out of the scope of this law.

The government cannot read every packet that passes over the Internet.