U.S. Says It May Not Need Apple’s Help to Unlock iPhone

Re:U.S. Says It May Not Need Apple’s Help to Unlock iPhone by scott00 on Tuesday March 22, 2016 @11:46AM (#11337397)

The 14th amendment is not relevant to actions taken by the FBI. It's an arm of the federal government, and the 14th amendment serves mostly to clarify that state governments (in addition to the federal government) must refrain from violating rights granted to US citizens through the constitution.

However, the FBI must abide by the 4th amendment, which specifies that warrants are needed for searches. The issue of whether data of foreigners located on US soil is subject to warrant-less search/inspection is a matter of interpreting the 4th amendment.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:U.S. Says It May Not Need Apple’s Help to Unlock iPhone by pbhjpbhj on Tuesday March 22, 2016 @09:42PM (#11341487)

So data from a foreign national held in a computer in a particular State isn't within that states jurisdiction?

If the 4th requires warrants and the 14th requires state to treat all people as having equal protection under the law in their jurisdiction I don't see where the FBI can go [legally speaking] to do warrantless search of foreign nationals.

In short, how then can a State allow the FBI to operate within its jurisdiction in a way that doesn't provide all people equal legal protections. The State would have to prevent the FBI from operating?

Thanks for any further insights.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:U.S. Says It May Not Need Apple’s Help to Unlock iPhone by rmc on Tuesday March 22, 2016 @05:06PM (#11339961)

> However, the FBI must abide by the 4th amendment, which specifies that warrants are needed for searches. The issue of whether data of foreigners located on US soil is subject to warrant-less search/inspection is a matter of interpreting the 4th amendment.

And the interpretation is that a warrent isn't needed. The 4th doesn't protect me.

[ Parent | on HN ]