Speaker 1: Well, now is time for our daily Bloomberg Law Brief,
Speaker 1: exploring legal issues in the news. It's brought to you
Speaker 1: by American Arbitration Association, International Trade or Business Dispute Resolve
Speaker 1: Faster with the International Center for a Dispute Resolution, the
Speaker 1: leader in alternative dispute resolution around the world i c
Speaker 1: d R dot org. Today Bloomberg, Laho, Student Grosso and
Speaker 1: Michael Best discuss a recent court ruling affecting the ability
Speaker 1: of law enforcement to compel someone to use a fingerprint
Speaker 1: to unlock their phone. They speak with Robert Mints, a partner,
Speaker 1: and McCarter and English Bob under what circumstances is it
Speaker 1: clear that the government can get a warrant to force
Speaker 1: someone to unlock an iPhone with a fingerprint. Well, that
Speaker 1: issue has come before the courts before, and the courts
Speaker 1: have held where there is a very specified need for
Speaker 1: that information and the government has made out clear probable
Speaker 1: cause um connecting the individual with the information that may
Speaker 1: be on their cell phone. Prosecutors can in some instances
Speaker 1: force an individual to unlock a cell phone, but in
Speaker 1: this case, the court found that there was insufficient evidence
Speaker 1: based on the warrant that was presented to the magistrate
Speaker 1: judge to require individuals who just happened to be on
Speaker 1: the premises to use their sums to unlock their cell phones,
Speaker 1: and the court relied both on Fourth Amendment and on
Speaker 1: syste Amendment grounds in denying that request. You know, Bob,
Speaker 1: it seems a little strange on some level to be
Speaker 1: talking about the Fourth Amendment rights of people when we
Speaker 1: don't even know if they're going to be there, and
Speaker 1: their Fifth Moment rights we don't know who's going to
Speaker 1: be there. Is Is it normal in a warrant application
Speaker 1: for the government to ask about the methods by which
Speaker 1: they're going to search people they might find at the
Speaker 1: at the location. Well, that is unusual, Michael. I mean,
Speaker 1: usually what a warrant does is it establishes probable cause
Speaker 1: that a crime has been committed and that evidence of
Speaker 1: that crime is located at a particular premises. So, in
Speaker 1: other words, it is based entirely on the premises and
Speaker 1: not on a person. In this case, this warrant application
Speaker 1: and the judge's opinion got into issues of acts of
Speaker 1: production and conduct by individuals who, as you mentioned, may
Speaker 1: or may not even be at the premises at the
Speaker 1: time that the search is executed and as Robert mensa
Speaker 1: partner at McCarter in English speaking at Bloomberg Laho student
Speaker 1: cross So you can listen to Bloomberg Law weekdays at
Speaker 1: one pm Wall Street Time here on Bloomberg Radio, and
Speaker 1: that is this morning's Bloomberg Law Brave. You'll find more
Speaker 1: legal news at Bloomberg Law dot com and Bloomberg b
Speaker 1: NA dot com. Attorneys will find exceptional legal research and
Speaker 1: business development tools there as well. Visit Bloomberg Law dot
Speaker 1: com and Bloomberg b NA dot com for more information