That line bothers me for a different reason: it is not true. Nothing in Lavabit's design prevented Ladar from tapping any one user's communications. In fact, the entire design of Lavabit makes it possible, since all cryptographic operations are performed server-side.
What the line should say is, "Thanks to Lavabit's design, Ladar would have had to spend half an hour coding a wiretapping solutoin."
Regardless of how long it would take to implement such a solution, the fact that he took such a principled stand against the entire might of the US government is extraordinarily commendable. The ire around this case should be directed exclusively at the agencies and parties involved in creating this rapidly growing police state, not at the people who are involved in making the story public. The world needs more people like Ladar Levison.
Yes, it is comendable that Ladar took a stand. That does not change the fact that Lavabit did not provide its users with the kind of security that people claim. If Ladar had been less principled, then what?
We need people who will take stands, but we also need systems that are inherently hard to wiretap.
I agree that crypto is no doubt the best way to go. However, it seems clear that in the case they do not get what they want initially, the next step is, "Okay, we'll just take it all."
What the line should say is, "Thanks to Lavabit's design, Ladar would have had to spend half an hour coding a wiretapping solutoin."