Here’s my writ for a drug dealer’s phone, and evidence that Apple has done it before. Open it. Here’s the phone of a civil dissident in China, do the same. Here’s the phone of a woman caught driving in Saudi Arabia, open it. Here’s the phone of a Christian in Afghanistan, unlock it.
Once done, it will have to be always done.
Moreso, what really is the material difference between this and ordering a baker to make a cake? Are there other areas of the RFP process that should also be handled by judicial writ?
And does this writ give immunity to Apple against lawsuits for false advertising saying that Apple claimed these phones were secure than deliberately made them less so?
There are thousands of issues clouding this whole debate. At the core, the perennial question of trading temporary security at the cost of liberty. Does opening the San Bernardino County owned phone of the husband of a Pakistani terrorist justify all?
I don’t think so. I doubt that there is any relevant data available on that phone.
Almost certainly not. There were early reports that the terrorists had destroyed their phones -- the obvious conclusion is if they talked to any other terrorists (which isn't all that likely; they simply wouldn't have needed anybody else to help with a "barge in and shoot up the place" attack), they did it on their own personal phones, not their government-issued work phones. They're evil, not stupid.