The FBI Just Canceled Its Big Court Showdown With Apple

The feds now say they might be able to unlock the San Bernardino phone themselves.

Marcio Jose Sanchez/AP

For indispensable reporting on the coronavirus crisis, the election, and more, subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter.


The FBI has said for weeks that it needed Apple’s help to unlock the iPhone belonging to San Bernardino shooter Syed Farook. Apple—and only Apple—could write the code needed to open up the phone and get the information inside, said agency officials in interviews, congressional hearings, and court documents. Now that story has changed.

“On Sunday, March 20, 2016, an outside party demonstrated to the FBI a possible method for unlocking Farook’s iPhone,” the agency wrote in a court document submitted on Monday. “If the method is viable, it should eliminate the need for the assistance from Apple Inc.” The court agreed to the government’s request to cancel the first hearing in the case, which was set to take place on Tuesday, while the FBI tests the new method.

The FBI convinced a federal judge last month that Apple should be forced to write code that would allow the FBI to take an unlimited number of guesses at the phone’s lock screen password without triggering its data-wiping feature. The judge’s order sparked a backlash as Apple loudly fought the order and began to rally public opinion against the specter of vastly increased government spying power. Both the company and the FBI filed testy briefs in the case, with Apple calling the government’s demands “dangerous” and “reckless” and the government saying Apple’s position was “corrosive of the very institutions that are best able to safeguard our liberty.”

No one yet knows which “outside party” provided the FBI with the information, but Justice Department officials told reporters on a conference call that the new method did not come from another government agency. Apple and others, including former national security officials, have suggested the FBI should have asked the National Security Agency for help in unlocking the phone, which is legally permissible.

Privacy advocates including Edward Snowden celebrated the government’s decision as a vindication of their arguments in the case.

 

 

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest