Reading what you write is like reading "Pravda" during the Soviet era.
I only like to stir you up once in awhile because it's sorta funny to rattle your cage and watch you dance and screech.
:)
Apple responded to the search warrants they were served for the data they held involving the San Bernardino Terrorists case and duly handed over those data they held.
Apple did not receive a search warrant relating to the iPhone 5C for the San Bernardino terrorist case nor did they receive a search warrant for the New York drug case, for which the defendant has already pled guilty. They did not get search warrants for those items for the very simple reason that they have nothing to do with holding the data on those devices, nor do they have those data in their possession to be in a position to hand it over. In each case, Apple was served a court order using the All Writs Act of 1789 (as amended at various times to modernize the language) which is NOT a search warrant by any stretch of the imagination or law.
The All Writs Act is under some very specific constraints laid down by Case Law and the US Supreme Court. . . and these Court Orders did not meet those legal constraints.
Apple is allowed by law to challenge the use of these All Writs Act Court Orders, and in fact, it says exactly that in the Court Orders, and Apple did exactly that. In the New York case, Apple won the challenge on several legal legal grounds and the court order was vacated. Primarily on the grounds that the Court Order was illegal because the moving party, the FBI and DOJ, were prohibited by Federal Law from seeking to force Apple to do what they were requesting by the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act passed by Congress in 1994, which made the All Writs Act unenforceable once Congress addressed an issue in any manner at all, even if they took it up and elected to take no action. In this Act, Congress actually took action and in the CALEA LAW prohibited any law enforcement agency or its agents from specifically doing what the FBI was trying to get the courts to do for it. That is not legally allowed, but the FBI tried it anyway. . . and the record shows the FBI deliberately obfuscated the case law and the Supreme Court rulings from the Magistrate judges when they asked for the court orders.
Reading what you write is like reading "Pravda" during the Soviet era.
I only like to stir you up once in awhile because it's sorta funny to rattle your cage and watch you dance and screech.
:)