NYC judge unlocks door to Apple privacy win

Published Tue, Mar 1 201612:31 PM EST

Breakingviews

Reynolds Holding

A New York judge may have unlocked the door to an Apple privacy win. The federal magistrate in Brooklyn on Monday said the FBI can't force the technology giant to bypass an iPhone's security. The ruling confirms that a 225-year-old law doesn't apply and that the hack would unduly burden Apple. It's a roadmap for the better-known case unfolding in a California court and in Congress. The two prosecutions involve very different crimes: drug dealing in New York, and the killing of 14 people in San Bernardino, California. But both raise the hot-button issue of whether U.S. enforcers can require Chief Executive Tim Cook's company to produce software that would help them extract potential evidence form a smartphone. A Los Angeles magistrate ruled in favor of the feds, saying a valid search warrant, national security concerns and the All Writs Act of 1789 gave them the legal right to force Apple's hand. The company, which didn't get a chance to make its case before the ruling, protested mightily and its appeal will be heard later this month. The New York judge was far more skeptical, waiting until after he had heard Apple's case. His opinion adopted many of the company's arguments. More from Breakingviews : Jamie Dimon to Wells Fargo: Go ahead, make my day The All Writs Act, which permits courts to fill gaps in their legal jurisdiction, didn't apply, he said, when in other laws Congress had already spared the likes of Apple from the sorts of demands the FBI was making. What's more, requiring the company to compromise iPhone security – and undermine a feature that many customers find attractive – would unreasonably harm Apple's business and philosophy. The jurist, whose ruling will be reviewed by a higher judge, stressed that his ruling addressed only whether the law required the company to cooperate, not whether helping the FBI was a good idea. The latter issue, he said, was a matter for Congress, a view shared by Apple as well as the law enforcement agency. Congress, meanwhile, will get a chance to weigh in on Tuesday, when Apple General Counsel Bruce Sewell and FBI Director James Comey testify before the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee. With personal privacy pitted against the needs of law enforcement, neither side can count on legislators' support. But at least the matter will be squarely before those best positioned to decide the issues involved. For more independent commentary and analysisfrom Reuters Breakingviews, visit breakingviews.com

Apple supporters protest outside the F.B.I. headquarters in Washington, D.C. on Feb. 23, 2016.

Matt Cuddy | CNBC

A New York judge may have unlocked the door to an Apple privacy win.

The federal magistrate in Brooklyn on Monday said the FBI can't force the technology giant to bypass an iPhone's security. The ruling confirms that a 225-year-old law doesn't apply and that the hack would unduly burden Apple. It's a roadmap for the better-known case unfolding in a California court and in Congress.

The two prosecutions involve very different crimes: drug dealing in New York, and the killing of 14 people in San Bernardino, California. But both raise the hot-button issue of whether U.S. enforcers can require Chief Executive Tim Cook's company to produce software that would help them extract potential evidence form a smartphone.