Apple’s compliance with Trump-era subpoenas for House members’ iPhone records stands in contrast to its stance in the San Bernardino case.
From Tim Cook’s “Message to Our Customers” posted in 2016:
The United States government has demanded that Apple take an unprecedented step which threatens the security of our customers. We oppose this order, which has implications far beyond the legal case at hand.
This moment calls for public discussion, and we want our customers and people around the country to understand what is at stake.
When the FBI has requested data that’s in our possession, we have provided it. Apple complies with valid subpoenas and search warrants, as we have in the San Bernardino case. We have also made Apple engineers available to advise the FBI, and we’ve offered our best ideas on a number of investigative options at their disposal.
We have great respect for the professionals at the FBI, and we believe their intentions are good. Up to this point, we have done everything that is both within our power and within the law to help them. But now the U.S. government has asked us for something we simply do not have, and something we consider too dangerous to create. They have asked us to build a backdoor to the iPhone.
My take: Did it occur to anyone at Apple that Executive Branch demands for Congressional iPhone metadata might not qualify as valid subpoenas?
“When the FBI has requested data that’s in our possession, we have provided it. Apple complies with valid subpoenas and search warrants, as we have in the San Bernardino case.”
Of course the real problem in this case is the Trump attitude towards power and law. The election put the Fox in charge of the Hen house. The pushback that might have been useful would have had to come from the Justice Department or Judicial system not Apple. The System which should have prevented this was not as strong as the people who figured out how to abuse it.
Cook: “We follow the laws for the companies in which we operate.”
I believe the answer is yes. Why wouldn’t they believe a DoJ subpoena for metadata was valid?
The big difference between the San Bernardino request and this one, as we all know now, is the former was all about Comey’s and other law enforcement agency’s agenda to get a “backdoor” on iPhones.
This request did not request a backdoor to iPhones.
CONCLUSION
It appears that Apple will always comply with court ordered requests for metadata on individuals as long as they don’t compromise the built-in privacy software and hardware of their products. Otherwise, Apple is essentially politically neutral on compliance.
Trump and Barr were using gov’t agencies to “investigate” his personal political opponents. Not to mention over-turn an election, incite an insurrection and break serious election laws – which are impeachable offenses. We all know how that turned out.
MY OPINION
This latest revelation is fall-out from the last administration’s corruption – with plenty more to come.
My gut says this is a case where the Apple lawyers could look at this, ignore the political context, and ask themselves “If this came from the Obama administration, how would we treat it?” It may well be there was ‘selective prosecution,’ but that wouldn’t necessarily invalidate the subpoena. Do we really want companies to make decisions based on political considerations (versus the legal considerations?)
Imagine Donald Trump:
“That’s a really nice company you have there. It would be a shame if something were to happen to it.”
And now we’ve got Biden and a bunch of wussy Democrats who won’t stand up and push back against that distorted history.