[goffley3]

It's hard to believe something like this wouldn't fall under the fourth or fifth amendment.

[otterley]

The Government already has a warrant; so the Fourth Amendment is satisfied. The question in this case is whether the Government can compel Apple to help them execute the warrant.

[rtpg]

There's some interesting case law around locked things. One train of thought is that the govt can force you to give the key to a safe, but can't force you to give the combination to a safe.

The Apple extension would be that the govt can force unlocking by Apple (since they have a key) but not by you. All the more you reason to make it technically impossible ...

[sbov]

Do they have a key? I thought the point of the recent iPhone encryption is that they don't have a key?

[rtpg]

In the case mentioned, the phone was running an older version of iOS where they could, in fact, unlock the phone.

But the recent ones make it impossible, yeah

[nickodell]

The fifth amendment doesn't apply. This isn't self-incrimination.

As to whether the fourth amendment applies - that's the question they're answering in court. Is this a search, in which case the government can compel Apple to disclose useful information, or is the DoJ asking for Apple to do something on their behalf?