Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

Justice Department Blasts Apple in Court Documents, Calls Rhetoric ‘False’ and ‘Corrosive’

The U.S. Attorney accuses Apple and others in the tech industry of trying to “alarm” the court.

Bryan Thomas / Getty

The Department of Justice blasted Apple in a court document arguing the company should be forced to abide by the court’s order to help unlock a phone used by one of the San Bernardino attackers.

The government argues that Apple — “a corporation that grosses hundreds of billions of dollars a year” — is “fully capable” of developing software that would disable security on the iPhone and allow federal investigators to search the device for evidence. Apple says it would require a handful of employees mere weeks to do so.

The hardship the court’s order in the San Bernardino case poses is one of the company’s own making, the government argues Thursday in a court filing. It says Apple erected the technological obstacles that prevent investigators from searching the device for evidence related to the shooting.

“Apple deliberately raised technological barriers that now stand between a lawful warrant and an iPhone containing evidence related to the terrorist mass murder of 14 people,” the government writes. “Apple alone can remove those barriers.”

U.S. Attorney Eileen Decker reasserts that the government’s request is a narrow one — compelling Apple to help federal investigators unlock a single device. She argues the iPhone at the center of this dispute is owned by San Bernardino county, which has already agreed to the search. The now-dead terrorist who used the device, Syed Rizwan Farook, also consented to the search as a condition of his employment with the county.

“In short, the Order invades no one’s privacy and raises no Fourth Amendment concerns,” Decker writes.

FBI Director James Comey acknowledged in testimony last week before the House Judiciary Committee that the case could potentially set a precedent for similar requests.

The justice department argues once again that federal investigators need to know what’s on the phone — and the government requires Apple’s help to conduct the search. The government disagrees with Apple’s arguments challenging the 200-year-old All Writs Act as “archaic,” saying the court order would lead to a “police state” and criticizing the FBI’s investigation as “shoddy” (though Comey openly admitted the FBI screwed up).

“Apple’s rhetoric is not only false, but also corrosive of the very institutions that are best able to safeguard our liberty and our rights: the courts, the Fourth Amendment, longstanding precedent and venerable laws, and the democratically elected branches of government,” Decker writes.

The government defends its use of the All Writs Act, saying the U.S. Supreme Court vetted its use to compel third parties to assist in gathering evidence. Decker accuses Apple and other technology companies that have supported it of employing scare tactics — the filing uses the words “trying to alarm the court” — in raising concerns about network security, back doors and encryption.

“That is a diversion. Apple desperately wants — desperately needs — this case not to be ‘about one isolated iPhone,’” Decker writes. “But there is probable cause to believe there is evidence of a terrorist attack on that phone, and our legal system gives this Court the authority to see that it can be searched pursuant to a lawful warrant.”

This article originally appeared on Recode.net.

More in Technology

Podcasts
Are humanoid robots all hype?Are humanoid robots all hype?
Podcast
Podcasts

AI is making them better — but they’re not going to be doing your chores anytime soon.

By Avishay Artsy and Sean Rameswaram
Future Perfect
The old tech that could help stop the next airborne pandemicThe old tech that could help stop the next airborne pandemic
Future Perfect

Glycol vapors, explained.

By Shayna Korol
Future Perfect
Elon Musk could lose his case against OpenAI — and still get what he wantsElon Musk could lose his case against OpenAI — and still get what he wants
Future Perfect

It’s not about who wins. It’s about the dirty laundry you air along the way.

By Sara Herschander
Life
Why banning kids from AI isn’t the answerWhy banning kids from AI isn’t the answer
Life

What kids really need in the age of artificial intelligence.

By Anna North
Culture
Anthropic owes authors $1.5B for pirating work — but the claims process is a Kafkaesque messAnthropic owes authors $1.5B for pirating work — but the claims process is a Kafkaesque mess
Culture

“Your AI monster ate all our work. Now you’re trying to pay us off with this piece of garbage that doesn’t work.”

By Constance Grady
Future Perfect
Some deaf children are hearing again because of a new gene therapySome deaf children are hearing again because of a new gene therapy
Future Perfect

A medical field that almost died is quietly fixing one disease at a time.

By Bryan Walsh