Not especially shocking. The Gov'ts proposed theory of the All Writs Act as the legal equivalent of "sudo do whatever I want" was pretty damn tenuous.
+1 sudo indeed
Brooklyn Judge: Feds Can't Use All Writs Act to Force Apple's Hand [pdf]
21–30 of 198 posts
Re: Brooklyn Judge: Feds Can't Use All Writs Act to Force Apple's Hand [pdf]
#22I'd actually love to see this one make it to the supreme court, where I have pretty much no doubt, they would reach the exact same conclusion.
Or, the SCOTUS (currently down to 8 Justices) would deadlock and the ruling would fall back to the lesser court's decision in favor of the government. Forever.
Re: Brooklyn Judge: Feds Can't Use All Writs Act to Force Apple's Hand [pdf]
#23I'd actually love to see this one make it to the supreme court, where I have pretty much no doubt, they would reach the exact same conclusion.
Or, the SCOTUS (currently down to 8 Justices) would deadlock and the ruling would fall back to the lesser court's decision in favor of the government. Forever.
A tie in SCOTUS does not create binding precedent. Other circuit courts would be free to disagree, and a later SCOTUS could rule against the government.
Re: Brooklyn Judge: Feds Can't Use All Writs Act to Force Apple's Hand [pdf]
#24Why would this stop at smartphones? If the FBI's arguments would be upheld, couldn't the FBI require home manufacturers to build in literal back doors for use only by the government
Re: Brooklyn Judge: Feds Can't Use All Writs Act to Force Apple's Hand [pdf]
#25I'd actually love to see this one make it to the supreme court, where I have pretty much no doubt, they would reach the exact same conclusion.
Or, the SCOTUS (currently down to 8 Justices) would deadlock and the ruling would fall back to the lesser court's decision in favor of the government. Forever.
... for that Circuit only.
Re: Brooklyn Judge: Feds Can't Use All Writs Act to Force Apple's Hand [pdf]
#26The conclusion is pretty clear. Ultimately, the question to be answered in this matter, and in others like it across the country, is not whether the government should be able to force Apple to help it unlock a specific device; it is instead whether the All Writs Act resolves that issue and many others like it yet to come. For the reasons set forth above, I conclude that it does not. The government's motion is denied.…
This is one of those times I really wish we had a functioning legislative branch. They could write and pass a law describing companies' obligations and law enforcement's powers when dealing with strong encryption on smartphones. Then people who disagreed could take it to the courts, and a Supreme Court with an odd number of justices could decide whether said law was constitutional. Unfortunately we do not live in tha…
In the event of a tie, the the lower court is the tie-breaker. Having an even number of justices doesn't break the court, and even if it did, it'd be another long while before this case could be appealed that high anyway.
Even if we're to believe the rhetoric that the Senate isn't going to appoint any candidate, nobody's even been nominated yet, so the idea that the whole system is broken may be true, but not for the reasons speculated.
Re: Brooklyn Judge: Feds Can't Use All Writs Act to Force Apple's Hand [pdf]
#27Isn't the All Writs Act just a red herring in this whole debate? What's preventing the Federal Government from issuing Apple a National Security Letter and forcing them to comply in secrecy?
I don't understand how all of a sudden the government is publicly and calmly asking permission to do something digitally when they have been so forceful and demanding in the recent past.
Re: Brooklyn Judge: Feds Can't Use All Writs Act to Force Apple's Hand [pdf]
#28I've written up the piece for InfoQ here:
http://www.infoq.com/news/2016/02/all-writs-denied
Basically, the motions in the piece indicate that the relationship with the All Writs Act that was successfully used before are not relevant; because in the prior case, the business property was being used to commit the crime, but in this case, the property was the owner of the accused, not Apple.
The Judge also highlighted "in other cases in the country" and had an explicit callback to the founding fathers and the constitution, suggesting that if the All Writs Act allowed the government to compel any American company to do anything it wanted that wasn't explicitly illegal, and therefore any American citizen, could be compelled to do almost anything.
Reuters are now reporting this directly, rather than just a link to the court order:
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-encryption-deny-idUS...
Re: Brooklyn Judge: Feds Can't Use All Writs Act to Force Apple's Hand [pdf]
#29The conclusion is pretty clear. Ultimately, the question to be answered in this matter, and in others like it across the country, is not whether the government should be able to force Apple to help it unlock a specific device; it is instead whether the All Writs Act resolves that issue and many others like it yet to come. For the reasons set forth above, I conclude that it does not. The government's motion is denied.…
This is one of those times I really wish we had a functioning legislative branch. They could write and pass a law describing companies' obligations and law enforcement's powers when dealing with strong encryption on smartphones. Then people who disagreed could take it to the courts, and a Supreme Court with an odd number of justices could decide whether said law was constitutional. Unfortunately we do not live in tha…
An even number of justices does not necessarily mean a deadlocked Supreme Court. Most cases are not decided 5-4 (though it may be true that the most controversial cases are more likely to be decided that way).
Re: Brooklyn Judge: Feds Can't Use All Writs Act to Force Apple's Hand [pdf]
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've seen a lot of doom and gloom about the current state of the US government all around the internet, but I have to say that this kind of thing helps me remain optimistic. A judge is free to make his or her decision without fear of coercion or some fanciful Tom Clancy-esque story unfolding as some people seem to believe things to work. The system may be flawed, but it's not broken yet.
I would feel a lot more confident about the US's overall state of corruption if the defendant in this case weren't the largest capitalized company in the world. Would this case have come to the same result (which is likely to be appealed) if it was say UnluckySmallCo. instead of Apple that was on the receiving end of the government's pressure?
If UnluckySmallCo. had created a phone that was used by defendants in nine separate cases, they probably would be big enough to handle it.