‘‘(2) MOTIONS TO QUASH OR MODIFY.—(A) A provider of electronic communication service to the public or remote computing service, including a foreign electronic communication service or remote computing service, that is being required to disclose pursuant to legal process issued under this section the contents of a wire or electronic communication of a subscriber or customer, may file a motion to modify or quash the legal process where the provider reasonably believes— ‘‘(i) that the customer or subscriber is not a United States person and does not reside in the United States; and ‘‘(ii) that the required disclosure would create a material risk that the provider would violate the laws of a qualifying foreign government.

Such a motion shall be filed not later than 14 days after the date on which the provider was served with the legal process, absent agreement with the government or permission from the court to extend the deadline based on an application made within the 14 days. The right to move to quash is without prejudice to any other grounds to move to quash or defenses thereto, but it shall be the sole basis for moving to quash on the grounds of a conflict of law related to a qualifying foreign government.

So, from what I understand, it's true that a judge need not approve the data collection before it is carried out, but it does not mean that a judge can not review the request to disclose. All the provider needs to do is submit a motion to quash on the grounds that the request to disclose conflicts with the law of the non-US host-nation. I don't think this is as scary as you're making it sound.

Also,

‘‘ the foreign government has adopted appropriate procedures to minimize the acquisition, retention, and dissemination of information concerning United States persons subject to the agreement; ‘‘(3) the terms of the agreement shall not cre ate any obligation that providers be capable of decrypting data or limitation that prevents providers from decrypting data; and

‘‘(4) the agreement requires that, with respect to any order that is subject to the agreement— ‘‘(A) the foreign government may not intentionally target a United States person or a person located in the United States, and shall adopt targeting procedures designed to meet this requirement;‘‘(B) the foreign government may not target a non-United States person located outside the United States if the purpose is to obtain information concerning a United States person or a person located in the United States."

This seems like a pretty deliberate motion to stop foreign governments from doing what people seem to fear that the U.S. wants to do, which is addressed in the first quote block.