The first one doesn't say anything about constitutional issues.
The appeals court did not rule on whether the surveillance violated the U.S. Constitution.
The second link has a ton of links. The first one is only referring to a preliminary injunction; i.e., it found that "there's a good chance the plaintiff will win", but did not find in favor of the plaintiff. As far as I can tell, all the other links there are about the same ruling.
The third link is talking about that same ruling, again:
A federal judge said Monday that he believes the government's once-secret collection of domestic phone records is unconstitutional
Emphasis on believes; that was not a judicial finding that the government violated the constitution.
He didn't even order the government to stop:
However, he put off enforcing his order barring the government from collecting the information, pending an appeal by the government.
If years after the Snowden revelation, no one has gotten a court to rule that blatant widespread constitutional violations took place at the NSA, you might want to reconsider your claim that there were blatant violations.
http://www.freedomwatchusa.org/federal-judge-rules-against-n...
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/12/16/justice/nsa-surveillance-c...