> Law enforcement is explicitly prohibited from doing all sorts of things without a warrant that can then later be compelled by a court order.
It doesn't say they can't do it without a warrant. It says they unconditionally can't do it.
> Distinguishing between law enforcement and the government as a whole isn't complicated, headstand-inducing legal gymnastics, it's well-established legal reasoning.
The problem with trying to draw that distinction is that having the court order you to do it is how it always works. If CALEA said the FBI could order Apple to build the back door, the FBI still couldn't just throw Tim Cook in prison without trial if he refuses. They would still have to go to the court. So what the law is really saying is that law enforcement can't ask the court to order that -- but here they are asking anyway.
This isn't correct. More precisely, it does not address obtaining court orders.
> If CALEA said the FBI could order Apple to build the back door, the FBI still couldn't just throw Tim Cook in prison without trial if he refuses. They would still have to go to the court.
If the EPA tells you that you can't dump in the river, and you dump in a river, then they can prosecute you and send you to jail. But this is very different then getting a court order to do something as part of an investigation.
> This isn't correct. More precisely, it does not address obtaining court orders.
Please explain how the FBI could legally compel Apple to do something without a court order. If it's the only way it can happen then it's kind of implied.
> If the EPA tells you that you can't dump in the river, and you dump in a river, then they can prosecute you and send you to jail. But this is very different then getting a court order to do something as part of an investigation.
The primary difference apparently being that in that case there is something the law says you can't do, whereas in this case there is something the law says the government can't do.
It doesn't say they can't do it without a warrant. It says they unconditionally can't do it.
> Distinguishing between law enforcement and the government as a whole isn't complicated, headstand-inducing legal gymnastics, it's well-established legal reasoning.
The problem with trying to draw that distinction is that having the court order you to do it is how it always works. If CALEA said the FBI could order Apple to build the back door, the FBI still couldn't just throw Tim Cook in prison without trial if he refuses. They would still have to go to the court. So what the law is really saying is that law enforcement can't ask the court to order that -- but here they are asking anyway.