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.
Advertisement
“The tone of the brief reads like an indictment”, Apple General Counsel Bruce Sewell told reporters on a press call, referring to a response filing the Justice Department submitted earlier on Thursday that accused Apple of making “false” statements.
If the government’s request is granted, Apple said, “what is to stop the government from demanding that Apple write code to turn on the microphone in aid of government surveillance, activate the video camera, surreptitiously record conversations to track the phone’s user?”
He jokingly said the government’s allegation would be akin to Apple citing conspiracy theories in its court filings that J. Edgar Hoover may have had something to do with the assassination of John F. Kennedy.
The case will come to a head this month when Apple and the FBI go to federal court to contest the order.
“Here, 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 Americans”.
“Apple demands that the court should instead address the broad questions whether Apple should be required to unlock every iPhone in every instance, or whether Apple should be required to give the government the means to do so”, the Justice Department said in a motion filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.
Apple has said the government’s request would create a “back door” to phones that could be abused by criminals and governments, and that Congress hasn’t given the Justice Department legal authority to make such a demand.
In addition, Apple provided help in extracting data for law enforcement in more than 20,000 phones in the first half of 2015, including helping China and other countries, according to the government’s court papers. The claim “shows the desperation that the Department of Justice now feels”, he added.
“This is a diversion, ” the new court papers stated.
Apple and a number of other major tech firms – including Google, Facebook and Microsoft – have argued that the California case could set a risky precedent, one that could have a far-reaching impact on privacy in an era where personal information is increasingly protected on encrypted devices.
Apple CEO Tim Cook has called the order to unlock the gunman’s phone as “dangerous ” , “unconstitutional” and “bad for America”.
The Justice Department has repeatedly attempted to frame the Apple case as one that is not about undermining encryption and that the court order narrowly targets a “non-encryption barrier” on one iPhone. “Even this modest burden is largely a result of Apple’s own decision to design and market a almost warrant-proof phone”.
Advertisement
At this point, it’s very obvious that neither side wants to back down, so the dispute will be moved to the federal court on March 22.
