I support the constitution, of course. If it needs to be changed there is a stipulation inherent in the document to do just that.
But in this case you are talking about the 4th amendment which allows for the government to obtain information via warrants and court orders. I think Apple, like anyone else, has to comply with a court order, but I may be wrong. But I do know, being a lawyer myself, that defying a court order will land you in jail for contempt until you comply. It can’t be any other way if we are to accept the rule of law.
The law provides for a challange as far as I know.
Completely incorrect. There is no authority for the government to do anything in any amendment of the Constitution. The only thing the Constitution does is put a clear boundary around the laws that Congress (and now the States) make. Congress can make a law to require Apple to put back doors in all their devices. As long as Congress puts some flowery 4th amendment language into that law, it should pass Constitutional muster. But in this case there is no such law.
” I think Apple, like anyone else, has to comply with a court order, but I may be wrong.”
I don’t think any court order that violates the Constitution will be upheld. In this instance, the FBI is just bull$hitting some idiot judge. I have seen several legal scholars on TV who are saying the Apple will win the day just as the analysis of this post postulates.