Breaking iPhones Under CALEA and the All Writs Act: Why the Government Was (Mostly) Right

S. Morrison
{"title":"Breaking iPhones Under CALEA and the All Writs Act: Why the Government Was (Mostly) Right","authors":"S. Morrison","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2808773","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"During the investigation of the 2015 San Bernardino shooting, the government asked a district court to order Apple to draft code that would bypass the password protection system of one of the shooters’ iPhones. A number of experts opined that the All Writs Act (AWA) and the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) prohibited the court from issuing the order. This request was preceded by the holding of a New York District Court, which found that those statutes indeed did protect Apple from such compulsion. Although sympathetic to Apple, I argue that those experts and the New York court misinterpreted CALEA, and that the government’s interpretation of that statute was correct. The court’s ultimate ruling in favor of Apple, however, was the right one based on the discretionary factors governing the AWA’s applicability, set forth by the United States Supreme Court in United States v. New York Telephone Co.","PeriodicalId":190252,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Evidence (Public Law - Courts) (Topic)","volume":"126 ","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Evidence (Public Law - Courts) (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2808773","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

During the investigation of the 2015 San Bernardino shooting, the government asked a district court to order Apple to draft code that would bypass the password protection system of one of the shooters’ iPhones. A number of experts opined that the All Writs Act (AWA) and the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) prohibited the court from issuing the order. This request was preceded by the holding of a New York District Court, which found that those statutes indeed did protect Apple from such compulsion. Although sympathetic to Apple, I argue that those experts and the New York court misinterpreted CALEA, and that the government’s interpretation of that statute was correct. The court’s ultimate ruling in favor of Apple, however, was the right one based on the discretionary factors governing the AWA’s applicability, set forth by the United States Supreme Court in United States v. New York Telephone Co.
在CALEA和所有令状法案下破坏iphone:为什么政府(大部分)是正确的
在调查2015年圣贝纳迪诺枪击案期间,政府要求地方法院命令苹果公司起草代码,绕过其中一名枪手的iphone的密码保护系统。一些专家认为,《所有令状法》(AWA)和《执法通讯协助法》(CALEA)禁止法院发布命令。在这一请求之前,纽约地方法院裁定,这些法规确实保护苹果不受此类强制要求的影响。虽然我同情苹果公司,但我认为,那些专家和纽约法院误解了《加州法律与保护法案》,而政府对该法规的解释是正确的。然而,根据美国最高法院在“美国诉纽约电话公司”一案中规定的支配《AWA》适用性的自由裁量因素,法院最终做出了有利于苹果的裁决,这是正确的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信