[PeterisP]

They're probably treating it the same as refusing to open a safe given a valid warrant; the rights against self-incrimination do not extend to protecting the contents of your safe, drawers, private letters, etc, and also to the contents of your smartphone.

[OkayPhysicist]

See, but if you refused to open a safe for the cops, their fallback would be to drill it, not incarcerate you for failure to disclose the combination. Under that precedence, the cops have the right to try and crack my phone's encryption, but not to compel me to give them my passwords.

[Karellen]

> if you refused to open a safe for the cops, their fallback would be to drill it, not incarcerate you for failure to disclose the combination.

Or, more likely, they would do both.

They would drill it, and prosecute you for failing to comply with a valid court order (obstruction of justice, interfering with an investigation, contempt of court, or whatever...).

[PeterisP]

But they can charge and punish you for refusing to open the safe, that's obstruction of justice even if they could drill it and drilled it.

[namdnay]

Because they have a fallback. I presume that if someone were to invent an uncrackable safe they would adopt the same stance as encryption