You keep invoking the 4th A. You do realize that the phone in question is not Apple’s property, don’t you? What cause do the Feds have to compel a third party to do work for them under the 4th A? What warrant do you believe is being issued to Apple, and what “persons, houses, papers, and effects” belonging to Apple do the Govt. have probable cause to seize and examine? Are you suggesting Apple is a conspirator?
“What warrant do you believe is being issued to Apple, and what “persons, houses, papers, and effects†belonging to Apple do the Govt. have probable cause to seize and examine? Are you suggesting Apple is a conspirator?”
No one is suggesting APPL is a conspirator. They are impeding the investigation and are doing it provocatively. Because it is their proprietary software blocking the investigation into the ISIS killers, they are, in effect, protecting them. They could have opened this thing.
I mention the 4th amendment because this will be used by an activist court at some point to contend that people do not have to comply with the part of the 4th amendment that the APPL bots ALWAYS leave out in this discussion, as you did above: “...and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
The court has done just that. They have isolated the part of the program that has yet to be challenged, which could lead to a dangerous precedent, “the dog ate my homework.”
Don’t take a high tone with me. I know what I am talking about. As do you, I suspect. So far APPL has disseminated so much crap about all of this it’s pathetic. They could have done this easily, but didn’t. Do you wonder why? Could there POSSIBLY be a better time to try to establish a precedent that could leave a hole in the 4th amendment, when it is NOT a case of national security, but, say, the eviction of widow and orphans? Corporate espionage? Any of the thousand os reasons daily that people who have either committed or been on the recieving end of some sort of foul play?
Let’s not pretend this is just nothing. And without Justice Scalia, I couldn’t think of a better time to try to get that old Camels nose under the tent. Could you? If it goes to the Supremes, and they split (which is somewhat more likely now) it will bounce back to the ninth in CA. Which way do you think they will go?
So please, as Tom Cotton (R., Ark.), a member of the Senate intelligence Committee who shares Mr. Trump’s opinion and thinks it’s going to take action from Congress to deal with the impasse. Said Mr. Cotton:
Apple chose to protect a dead ISIS terrorist’s p‎rivacy over the security of the American people. The Executive and Legislative Branches have been working with the private sector with the hope of resolving the ‘Going Dark’ problem, the position Tim Cook and Apple have taken shows that they are unwilling to compromise and that legislation is likely the only way to resolve this issue. The problem of end-to-end encryption isn’t just a terrorism issue. It is also a drug-trafficking, kidnapping, and child pornography issue that impacts every state of the Union.
All the “good people of the left” and APPL investors are on this like a dog on a bone. This will ultimately be an attempt to make the big dogs like APPL and GOOG our “protectors” from the government and not the other way around, as it should be.
Does that answer your question as to why the 4th amendment is important?
The ownership of the device (as they refer to it here) is immaterial to the order. The order is to compel them to remove the block, through various (and surprisingly generous list of methods) so we can just get this over. Here is the Court Order issued to APPL in hopes of heading off the need for legislation and appeals ad nauseum while the hoped-for trail to the jihadists in killing 14 of our citizen in cold blood grows colder:
Attorneys for Applicant
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE MATTER OF THE SEARCH OF
AN APPLE IPHONE SEIZED DURING
THE EXECUTION OF A SEARCH
WARRANT ON A BLACK LEXUS IS300,
CALIFORNIA LICENSE PLATE
35KGD203
ORDER COMPELLING APPLE,
INC. TO ASSIST AGENTS IN SEARCH
This matter is before the Court pursuant to an application
pursuant to the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. 1651, by Assistant United
States Attorneys Tracy Wilkison and Allen Chiu, requesting an order
directing Apple Inc. (â€Appleâ€) to assist law enforcement agents in
enabling the search of a digital device seized in the course of a
previously issued search warrant in this matter.
For good cause shown, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Apple shall assist in enabling the search of a cellular telephone,
Apple make: iPhone 5C, Model: A1532, P/N:MGFG2LL/A, S/N:FFMNQ3MTG2DJ,
IMEI:358820052301412, on the Verizon Network, (the “SUBJECT DEVICEâ€)
pursuant to a warrant of this Court by providing
reasonable technical assistance to assist law enforcement agents in
obtaining access to the data on the SUBJECT DEVICE.
2. Apple’s reasonable technical assistance shall accomplish
the following three important functions: (1) it will bypass or
disable the auto-erase function whether or not it has been enabled;
(2) it will enable the FBI to submit passcodes to the SUBJECT DEVICE
for testing electronically via the physical device port, Bluetooth,
Wi-Fi, or other protocol available on the SUBJECT and (3) it
will ensure that when the FBI submits passcodes to the SUBJECT
DEVICE, software running on the device will not purposefully
introduce any additional delay between passcode attempts beyond what
is incurred by Apple hardware.
3. Apple’s reasonable technical assistance may include, but is.
not limited to: providing the FBI with a signed iPhone Software
file, recovery bundle, or other Software Image File (â€SIFâ€) that can
be loaded onto the SUBJECT DEVICE. The SIF will load and run from
Random Access Memory (â€RAMâ€) and will not modify the iOS on the
actual phone, the user data partition or system partition on the
device’s flash memory. The SIF will be coded by Apple with a unique
identifier of the phone so that the SIF would only load and execute
on the SUBJECT DEVICE. The SIF will be loaded via Device Firmware
Upgrade (â€DFUâ€) mode, recovery mode, or other applicable mode
available to the FBI. Once active on the SUBJECT DEVICE, the SIF
will accomplish the three functions specified in paragraph 2. The
SIF will be loaded on the SUBJECT DEVICE at either a government
facility, or alternatively, at an Apple facility; if the latter,
Apple shall provide the government with remote access to the SUBJECT
DEVICE through a computer allowing the government to conduct passcode
recovery analysis.
4. If Apple determines that it can achieve the three functions
stated above in paragraph 2, as well as the functionality set forth
in paragraph 3, using an alternate technological means from that
recommended by the government, and the government concurs, Apple may
comply with this Order in that way.
5. Apple shall advise the government of the reasonable cost of
providing this service.
6. Although Apple shall make reasonable efforts to maintain
the integrity of data on the SUBJECT DEVICE, Apple shall not be
required to maintain copies of any user data as a result of the
assistance ordered herein. All evidence preservation shall remain
the responsibility of law enforcement agents.
7. To the extent that Apple believes that compliance with this
Order would be unreasonably burdensome, it may make an application to
this Court for relief within five business days of receipt of the
Order.
Signed: SHERI PYM
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Dated: FEB 16, 2016
As you probably know an order to compel testimony says you shall, but means you will or else...like myself, Donald Trump and most conservatives, we believe this to be a cheap stunt for APPL to bring the legislation to wdge this into a court proceeding. They picked the wrong test case, in my opinion, but blocking a Federal investigation is pretty serious, or so think most of us “law and order” types. You’ll notice that every one of Cook’s complaints are unfounded and accomodated in one way or another by the court....so let’s get them into court and let them show cause as to why they can ignore a court order! I have no patience for the cute little game APPL is playing, but I do understand they do NOT want to let a crisis go unexploited. And if I was a stockholder, I’d be sweating bullets, because WHEN this gambit fails, Timmy will be driving off a cliff that will make Q4 look like the good old days.
The All Writs Act, by the way, has been used to compel DNA samples. It’s been used to compel handwriting exemplars. It’s been used in the pen register context well before there was any statute that spoke on the issue of pen registers. And so, in that way, it is, by and large, a catchall statute.
Only the Progressives and the Tech Gods have tried to discredit the Act because it has an origin that is so old. But, like Justice Scalia, I am an originalist and think it is perfectly good today. While this provision has a long history, the present language of the Act dates from 1948 and 1949 amendments. Essentially it is a blanket provision allowing court orders to enforce judicial actions and it has been used many, many times. But in typical lib fashion, they have tried to ridicule our system since they believe socialism should be much, much better.