The U.S. Supreme Court denied conservative legal activist Larry Klayman’s request for a fast-tracked review of the National Security Agency’s bulk collection of American phone records on Monday.

Klayman won a preliminary injunction against the program – stayed pending appeal – from U.S. District Judge Richard Leon on Dec 16. Leon deemed the collection “almost Orwellian” and almost certainly a violation of the Fourth Amendment. He did not address Klayman’s First and Fifth Amendment arguments in the preliminary decision.

The Department of Justice appealed Leon’s ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, but Klayman sought to leapfrog that appeals court and take the case directly to the Supreme Court.

[RELATED: DOJ Apologizes (Twice) for Misleading Surveillance Court]

“This case is of such imperative public importance that it justifies deviation from normal appellate practice and requires immediate consideration and determination in the Supreme Court,” he wrote in hisfiling with the high court.

The court denied Klayman's request without comment.

“It was a long shot, we gave it a college try,” Klayman tells U.S. News. “It’s not surprising, they obviously want it to go through the intermediate-level appellate courts first. [But] I wish they had taken it because every day our constitutional rights are violated is a day too much. It certainly would have served the American people to have this resolved as soon as possible.”

[READ: Company Sells 10K 'Snowden Phones' in 12 Hours]

After vigorously defending the program for months, President Barack Obama announced in March he favors ending the NSA’s in-house collection and five-year retention of all American phone records if Congress passes legislation to that effect. His administration has proposed requiring warrants before the NSA can collect records from phone companies.

If the program is ended and the contested collection banned, it’s possible cases filed after whistleblower Edward Snowden’s June 2013 leaks will be deemed moot by courts.

“The court can only enjoin programs that will continue into the future, not programs that existed in the past,” Douglas Laycock, a professor at the University of Virginia School of Law, told U.S. News after Obama’s pivot.

There are at least six lawsuits challenging the program. Each seeks declarations that the program is unconstitutional and permanent injunctions ending it.

[NSA: We Do Not Read Jimmy Carter's Emails] 

Klayman, unlike other challengers, seeks damages from Verizon and U.S. officials – which may keep....Continued Here