>Even if the bulk collection of telephony metadata constitutes a search, the Forth Amendment does not bar all searches and seizures. It bars only unreasonable searches and seizures. And the Government’s metadata collection program readily qualifies as reasonable under the Supreme Court’s case law.
He's clearly just enforcing the precedent set by the Supreme Court. When asked whether he'd have written the same thing if the case had occurred after Carpenter vs United States, he answered:
>"Do you think if Carpenter had been decided you would have written the concurrence you did in Klayman?" Leahy asked.
>"I don't see how I could have," Kavanaugh said.
If this one case is all you really need to know about Kavanaugh, then you may as well know the truth rather than a misunderstanding you took away from a single line of news article.
>though judges have, contrary to your opinion, some latitude
This is true, judges have enormous latitude to rule any way they see fit, there are a number of well known 'activist' judges serving today. However good judges understand that they're not legislators and try to enforce the law as accurately as possible.