Law Office of John W. Noonan
925-400-6635 Call For A Free Initial Consultation Se Habla Español Available 24/7

Apple/government court clash has key constitutional implications

An ongoing high-profile battle between federal government investigators and California-based Apple Inc. has grabbed the close attention of legal scholars and constitutional law pundits across the country.

And, we suspect, it will soon garner close scrutiny from millions of Americans who might be more closely affected by the goings-on than many of them readily realize.

The overriding focus of inquiry in today's post is government power, namely, the ability of criminal law authorities to use their considerable might and resources to engage in what are essentially spying activities that target the general public.

If that seems scary, well, it is. We touched upon the subject in our January 14 blog entry, noting therein that many citizens might "understandably react with alarm" to what can sometimes seem to be the unbridled powers of government agents to gather data intended as private. That information is often secured through the use of sophisticated and often unchecked surveillance technologies.

As many of our readers might already be aware, the Apple-government battle centers on a single smartphone, which the government believes might harbor information relevant to the recent and horrific mass fatal shootings in San Bernardino. The phone belonged to one of the shooters.

Agents can't crack its passcode and are demanding that Apple do it for them.

The company's response: Forget it.

Moreover, Apple -- which portrays the matter in terms of a government assault on the constitutional privacy rights of every American -- is willing to take the matter up the judicial ladder. Some commentators expect the case to end up before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Unquestionably, it is important. The government argues that the matter is narrowly confined to a single phone and that it is seeking only a one-time exception for a purpose that has national security implications.

Conversely, Apple argues that the code that safeguards its phones from unwanted access merits First Amendment free-speech protection under the Constitution.

The case goes far beyond the narrow dimensions that government lawyers posit, say Apple officials. Rather, it is starkly focused upon the delicate balance that must be maintained between the government's ability to investigate crime, on the one hand, and citizens' fundamental right to privacy, on the other.

No Comments

Leave a comment
Comment Information

Recent Case Results

  • Drunk Driving Offenses

    John was able to get client a reduction of charge of a DUI because of being a nurse it could mean her license.

    He secured a Drunk in Public , and she would attend a 3 month program. Additionally, the dmv hearing was also set aside.

    Both being a win for the client.

    Read More
  • Domestic Violence

    A client was arrested for a Felony Domestic Violence, could have devastated her potential for future employment. John was able to get the case dismissed. Client was thrilled.

    Read More
  • Juvenile Charges

    A juvenile was arrested for 2nd Degree Robbery. After 6 months the case was dismissed.

    A juvenile was arrested for Sexual Battery. After 6 months and 80 hours of Community service, the case was dismissed.

    Read More
  • Drunk Driving Offenses

    A client with a 1st DUI arrest. Fearing she would go to jail; lose her license for a year and lose her job. Got a wet reckless and minimal fines.

    Read More
  • Drug Charges

    A client with 4 Felony charges on a Transportation Charge, a Attempt to Sell, Possession of Marijuana, (50 pounds), Conspiracy Charge all where reduced to 1 Misdemeanor. No Jail.

    Client was charged with 6 Felony drug possessions. Facing jail time. The results: Client got a deferred entry of judgment and then dismissed.

    Client charged with several felony counts of possession of Marijuana with intent to sell. Client was involved in a medical marijuana grow. Case was reduced and later dismissed.

    Read More
  • Sex Crimes

    A client with alleged 2 Felony Sex charges and he faced jail and sex registration. The case was entirely dismissed.

    Client charged with prostitution; facing jail time and sex offender registration. Result: NO JAIL TIME AND NO SEX OFFENDER REGISTRATION Deferred Entry of Judgment.

    Read More
  • Domestic Violence

    Client charged with domestic violence, with great bodily injury. Case reduced to a misdemeanor with time served.

    Read More
Email Us For A Response

Learn How We Can Help

Bold labels are required.

Contact Information
disclaimer.

The use of the Internet or this form for communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form.

close

Privacy Policy

Areas We Serve

Dublin Office
6379 Clark Avenue
Suite 250
Dublin, CA 94568

Toll Free: 800-785-9556
Phone: 925-400-6635
Fax: 925-479-0015
Dublin Law Office Map

Manteca Office
210 East Center Street
Suite 10
Manteca, CA 95336

Toll Free: 800-785-9556
Phone: 209-498-3521
Fax: 925-479-0015
Manteca Law Office Map

Back To Top