I got tired hunting around for all the documents in the Apple-v-FBI case, so I decided to collect them all and put them GitHub. Then I found that JustSecurity had already done something like this here https://www.justsecurity.org/29634/readers-guide-magistrate-judge-writs-act-cases/.
Anyway, if there's some other doc you want in the collection, then create a pull request and contact me on Twitter @ErrataRob to tell me to accept the pull request.
2016-Feb-16
πΊπΈ [DoJ's application requesting the court order] (docs/2016-02-16-doj-application-for-court-order.pdf) This is where the DoJ officially asks the court to rule in their favor.
β Order Compelling Apple Inc. to Assist Agents in Search (ED No. 15-451M, Dkt. 19) This is the ruling agreeing with the DoJ that compells Apple. This gives Apple 5 days (later granted 3 extra days) to respond.
2016-Feb-19
π Apple tells court it will challenge the court order.
β Court scheduling order in response to Apple's challenge Judge schedules both sides to appear in court before her on March 22.
πΊπΈ DoJ reiterates its demand that Apple comply I don't understand the point of this.
2016-Feb-25
π Apple's motion to vacate This is Apple's official response challenging the court order. It's main arguments are:
- it would be an unreasonable burden
- it would violate First Amendment right to free-speech
- it would violate Fifth Amendment right to due process
2016-March-01
π Notice of Objections to February 16, 2016 Order Compelling Apple In.c to Assist Agents in Search I don't understand the purpose of this document.
2016-March-10
πΊπΈ DoJ's response to Apple DoJ responds to Apple, with a much more details exposition of their claims than their original application.
2016-March-15
2016-March-21
πΊπΈ Government's Ex Parte Application for Continuance Somebody demostrated to FBI they could get the information from phone, so DoJ asked for delay.
2016-March-22
β Order Granting Governmentβs Ex Parte Application to Vacate Hearing Now the date is April 5, by which time the DoJ has to report on whether this new technique will work.
The various briefs from both sides cite the following cases.
βUS v New York Telephone (1977) This is the case most cited by both sides in applying the All Writs Act to the modern world.
π (Apple's list of brief)(https://www.apple.com/pr/library/2016/03/03Amicus-Briefs-in-Support-of-Apple.html)