Federal Judge Takes Apple’s Side vs. Feds in New York

Reason: We have a new wrinkle in the encryption fight between Apple and the FBI. In a drug case, a magistrate judge in New York’s Eastern District has ruled that Apple does not need to assist the feds in unlocking a person’s phone and that the All Writs Act

does not extend to such a demand. From The New York Times:

Magistrate Judge James Orenstein in New York’s Eastern District said in a ruling on Monday that the United States government couldn’t use a law called the All Writs Act to force Apple to hack into an iPhone that was seized in connection with a drug case. The government overstepped what the All Writs Act was intended for, the judge wrote.

“After reviewing the facts in the record and the parties’ arguments, I conclude that

MORE

11 Comments on Federal Judge Takes Apple’s Side vs. Feds in New York

  1. The reality of this situation is being overlooked…
    There would be no reason to have bothered a judge in the first damned place had our representatives performed their sworn duties and NOT ALLOWED THE ENEMY WITHIN THE GATES TO BEGIN WITH… This is just another of a multitude of “created crisis” intended to erode our liberties for the sake of an agenda that has nothing to do with The Constitution but everything to do with subjugation.
    They let these people in this country, knowing full well what the result would be, in order to intentionally cause chaos and panic then place themselves in the position of savior… “by having access to the IPhone, we can prevent terrorism”…Why isn’t one media outlet pointing out that had the not let these bastards come here at all, the grubbermint would not need access to our phones/computers etc… Where the hell is that news story?




    0
  2. Why not just give Apple the phone, let them open it, then give it back to the federalies? Case closed.




    0
  3. @Jerry M – For Apple to get at the data they’d have to do what the govt wants them to do anyway: write a tailored firmware update, signed by Apple. That’s essentially what the judge said Apple cannot be forced to do.




    0
  4. Everybody knows that what the feds are trying to do is a danger to the privacy of every citizen who uses a phone.

    The FBI already had that jihadi phone unlocked, they should have got whatever they needed then. And Apple already gave them the data from the cloud. They want to force Apple to make a special spy software for them.

    It’s government overreach. I guess those humongous government spy centers are useless if they can’t access unencrypted data via some kind of special software.




    0
  5. Jerry Manderin
    March 1, 2016 at 12:36 am

    Why not just give Apple the phone, let them open it, then give it back to the federalies? Case closed.

    Because the chain of custody would be broken at that point and all the evidence inside rendered unusable in a court of law.

    Must remain in possession of law enforcement to maintain that.

    Too bad the dufus law man reset the pass code. They had everything they needed before that happened.




    0
  6. The government’s argument seems to be – if it’s not specifically prohibited in the Constitution the government has the right to do it. What the document ACTUALLY says is if it’s not specifically enumerated in the Constitution the federal government MAY NOT do it.

    This turning on its head and resulting enslavement is what citizens are fed up with and voting against.




    0
  7. So let me get this straight. The NSA, CIA and FBI have spent hundreds of billions on top secret surveillance equipment and they still can’t find out that Muslims want us all dead. Hell, the Koran put it in writing. Oh no, they want to take them to trial, convict them, then put them in prison so they can recruit more terrorists. The circle is complete. Now kill the bastards.




    0
  8. Just a guess, but the FBI’s position has less to do with catching terrorists than advertising the fact that they, the CIA, the NSA, and the DIA are incontrovertibly incompetent – except when it comes to murdering the innocent – or, in the FBI’s case, manufacturing evidence and playing for time with the Clinton server.

    Shame they closed Bletchley Park and Turing killed himself …




    0
  9. I really don’t see the privacy issue here.
    The guy is dead. if he had a safe with the documents in it would you all be hollering that it shouldn’t be opened?
    Also, Apple already does this for China and other countries it works with, so claiming hardship amounts to an advertising gimmick designed to lull the public into thinking they have free reign to run any kind of illegal operation over an IPhone with impunity.
    If the government does searches without a warrant, that is already illegal.
    Anyone who hands over information to a uninterested third party (in this case Apple) has no reasonable expectation of privacy. You should read the agreement you signed when you got that phone.




    0

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.




Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!