The problem is this: At the point they produce evidence that supports the requirements for activating said warrant, you the citizen, have the right, and the government is compelled to allow, you to answer to said charges. The Constitution makes no such allowance for the issuance of "no-answer" or "secret" warrants.
Also, the issuance of said warrant allows them the ability to to set aside your rights, to the effect that the constitution says you have the right to protect your interests, your property, and most important, your life.
Such warrants remove that protection, since YOU do not know they claim to already have evidence against you, thus the issuance of the warrant. You have the right to lawfully deprive them of the ability to produce evidence. Since evidence can now include things like incidental association, or just "looking" out of place, or even "being" in a particular place, without having being witnessed "engaged" in criminal activity.
Things like getting stopped for cruising in a bad neighborhood, for instance, is illegal because the law must witness you engaged in a crime, or have a warrant, to deprive you of ANY liberty.
There is no "probable cause" clause in the constitution. It must be witnessed in the first person, or evidence surrendered to the court to meet the conditions of the warrant. Hearsay doesnt cut it.
Further, the Constitution only allows for "limited" secrecy, confined to the executive branch, there is no power of transfer.
Liberty is our birthright. Your right to protect it, even from govco., corpco., or any other determined assault on your liberty is absolute.
Oh, and by the by, if govco., or any other entity can do it to you, you have the lawfull right to do it to them. The govco., cannot, and is prohibited from representing itself or any other entity above the citizen, whether in the singular, or agregate.
Damn.
