Did the Supreme Court get this one right?

Chester the Molester err Torrey Dale Grady is a twice convicted pervert. He was convicted of a second degree sexual offense in 1997, and in 2006 was convicted of taking indecent liberties with a child, a death penalty offense in my opinion. After he was released from prison, he was ordered to appear in Court as a recidivist and was ordered to undergo satellite based monitoring. Chester didn't like that. Cant say as I blame him, a monitor like that can put a damper on the sex relations, especially if it shows him in the vicinity of where a child goes missing, and an examination of his trail leads to her discovery. Some guys would rather be dead then go with out sex. For Grady, I'd opt for the former.
North Carolina in their efforts to get it right got it all wrong though. They ruled that the monitoring was not a search when clearly it is. That gave Chester a path to the Supreme court, and today they ruled that indeed it is a search. Thank GOD they did not end the discussion there though. They sent it back to Carolina with a note in the second to the last paragraph that the fourth amendment prohibits only unreasonable searches.
So is it reasonable to make a predator wear a monitor? I'd opt for chemical castration with a pound of tanerite for any one who molests a child.