FAN (First Amendment News, Special Series) Newseum Institute to Host Event on Cell Phone Privacy vs National Security Controversy
Starting today and continuing through mid-June, I will post a special series of occasional blogs related to the Apple iPhone national security controversy and the ongoing debate surrounding it, even after the FBI gained access to the phone used by the terrorist gunman in the December shooting in San Bernardino, California.
This special series is done in conjunction with the Newseum Institute and a major program the Institute will host on June 15, 2016 in Washington, D.C.
I am pleased to be working with Gene Policinski (the chief operating officer of the Newseum Institute) and Nan Mooney (a D.C. lawyer and former law clerk to Chief Judge James Baker of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces) in organizing the event.
The June 15th event will be a moot court with seven Supreme Court Justices and two counsel for each side. The focus will be on the First Amendment issues raised in the case. (See below re links to the relevant legal documents).
→ Save the Date: Wednesday, June 15, 2016 @ 2:00 p.m., Newseum, Washington, D.C. (more info forthcoming).
The Apple-FBI clash was the first significant skirmish — and probably not much more than that — of the Digital Age conflicts we’re going to see in this century around First Amendment freedoms, privacy, data aggregation and use, and even the extent of religious liberty. As much as the eventual outcome, we need to get the tone right, from the start — freedom over simple fear. –– Gene Policinski
Newseum Institute Moot Court Event
It remains a priority for the government to ensure that law enforcement can obtain crucial digital information to protect national security and public safety, either with cooperation from relevant parties, or through the court system when cooperation fails. — Melanie Newman (spokeswoman for Justice Department, 3-28-16)
As of this date, the following people have kindly agreed to participate as Justices for a seven-member Court:
- Floyd Abrams (Chief Justice)
- Stewart Baker (Associate Justice)
- Linda Greenhouse (Associate Justice)
- Lee Levine (Associate Justice)
- Harvey Rishikof (Associate Justice)
- Nadine Strossen (Associate Justice)
- Stephen Vladeck (Associate Justice)
The following two lawyers have kindly agreed to serve as the counsel (2 of 4) who will argue the matter:
→ Two additional Counsel to be selected.
Nan Mooney and I will say more about both the controversy and the upcoming event in the weeks ahead in a series of special editions of FAN. Meanwhile, below is some relevant information, which will be updated regularly.
Apple vs FBI Director James Comey
- Tim Cook, “A Message to Our Customers” (Feb. 16, 2016)
- James Comey, “We Could Not Look the Survivors in the Eye if We Did Not Follow this Lead,” Lawfare (Feb. 21, 2016)
- Apple Press Release, “Answers to your questions about Apple and security” (Feb. 22, 2016)
President Obama’s Statement
- Casey Newton, “Obama tells tech community to solve encryption problem now or pay later,” The Verge, March 11, 2016
→ Last Court Hearing: 22 March 2016, before Judge Sheri Pym
- Government’s Status Report (March 28, 2016 re dropping case)
- Apple’s Reply to Government’s Opposition to Apple Inc.’s Motion to Vacate Order Compelling Apple Inc. to Assist Agent’s Search (March 15, 2016)
- Government’s Reply in Support of Motion to Compel & Opposition to Apple Inc.’s Motion to Vacate Order (March 10, 2016)
- Government’s Motion to Compel Apple, Inc. to Comply with This Court’s Feb. 16, 2016 Order Compelling Assistance in Search (Feb. 19, 2016)
- Judge Sheri Pym’s Order Compelling Apple to Assist Agents in Search (Feb. 16, 2016)
- Government’s Ex Parte Application for Order Compelling Apple (Feb. 16, 2016)
- Amicus briefs filed on behalf of Apple
- Media Institute amicus brief in support of Apple
- Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association, the Association of Prosecuting Attorneys & The National Sheriffs’ Association’s amicus brief
- Lexis Legal News, Amicus Briefs Filed In Apple, FBI Dispute Over Locked iPhone
- “John Oliver Makes The Clearest Case Yet for iPhone Crypto,” Wired, March 14, 2016 (HBO video clip)
News Stories & Op-Eds
- Pierre Thomas & Mike Levine, “How the FBI Cracked the iPhone Encryption and Averted a Legal Showdown With Apple,” ABC News, March 29, 2016
- Bruce Schneier, “Your iPhone just got less secure. Blame the FBI,” Washington Post, March 29, 2016
- Katie Benner & Eric Lichtblau, “U.S. Says It Has Unlocked Phone Without Help From Apple,” New York Times, March 8, 2016
- John Markoff, Katie Benner & Brian Chen, “Apple Encryption Engineers, if Ordered to Unlock iPhone, Might Resist,” New York Times, March 17, 2016
- Jesse Jackson, “Apple Is on the Side of Civil Rights,” Time, March 17, 2016
- Katie Benner & Eric Lichtblau, “Apple and Justice Dept. Trade Barbs in iPhone Privacy Case,” New York Times, March 15, 2016
- Kim Zetter, “Apple and Justice Dept. Trade Barbs in iPhone Privacy Case,” Wired, March 15, 2016
- Alina Selyukh, “Apple On FBI iPhone Request: ‘The Founders Would Be Appalled,‘” NPR, March 15, 2016
- Howard Mintz, “Apple takes last shot at FBI’s case in iPhone battle,” San Jose Mercury News, March 15, 2016
- Russell Brandom & Colin Lecher, “Apple says the Justice Department is using the law as an ‘all-powerful magic wand‘,” The Verge, March 15, 2016
- Adam Segal & Alex Grigsby, “3 ways to break the Apple-FBI encryption deadlock,” Washington Post, March 14, 2016
- Seung Lee, “Former White House Official Says NSA Could Have Cracked Apple-FBI iPhone Already,” Newsweek, March 14, 2016
- Tim Bajarin, “The FBI’s Fight With Apple Could Backfire,” PC, March 14, 2016
- Alina Selyukh, “U.S. Attorneys Respond To Apple In Court, Call Privacy Concerns ‘A Diversion’,” NPR, March 10, 2016
- Dan Levine, “San Bernardino victims to oppose Apple on iPhone encryption,” Reuters, Feb. 22, 2016
- “Apple, The FBI And iPhone Encryption: A Look At What’s At Stake,” NPR, Feb. 17, 2016