Get the App
Join our growing community to challenge mainstream media bias and fix the news
Phone not protected from the police in the Fifth Amendment: NJ Court

Phone not protected from the police in the Fifth Amendment: NJ Court

According to the Supreme Court of New Jersey, the Fifth Amendment does not protect a person’s phone from the police and that the police can force a suspect to unlock their phone. According to the court, the Fifth Amendment may not apply if the police know the owner of the phone as well as the evidence that could be found in the phone.

Cory 1 months

This should be an easy one. If you're a suspect, you are assumed innocent until proven guilty. Your phone is a place containing personal information, conversations, etc... And should be protected. If they want in, get a warrant, then you can be forced to unlock it or face contempt. They can't forcibly search your house unless they believe that a crime has or is occurring, same for any bag you are carrying. If you don't let them, they have to convince a judge that there it reasonable cause to think that something in any of those places would prove a crime was committed. The idea that it should be assumed that the government already has this information is the reasoning behind forilcing you to unlock it is crap. And easily refuted by simply arguing that if they already have access to it, why do they need to unlock you phone.

Slevin Kelevra
Slevin Kelevra 1 months

"I swear it's 1234....I don't know why it's not working. I'm complying but it looks like my phone is broken."

Mocking Moniker
Mocking Moniker 1 months

Then install a kill switch so if you enter this code, your phone factory resets.

Jason 1 months

Where did these noobs go to law school? That is the VERY definition of the 4th Amendment.

dan 1 months

when this goes to the supreme court it should be over ruled the S C already ruled that the phone is a personal computer of sorts and can not be accessed by the police for little to no reason and the cops need a search warrant to search it

darkwingsmurf 1 months

Ok so here’s the apparent argument. They issued a search warrant for the passwords for his 2 phones. He is trying to argue he can’t be forever to give evidence against his self hence his 5th amendment defense. The court is basically saying the police have the right to your password once they issue a search warrant.

michael 1 months

we need to repeal the Patriot act. it has been a continuous disaster for our constitutional rights.

Lea 1 months

This is laughable. Well sort of.

Rob 1 months

It’s New Jersey! What did y’all expect?

Fin 1 months

How can u force me if I forgot the password.... Ok contempt n what else ya got

Andre Gerard
Andre Gerard 1 months

Sorry, can't remember!

Randall 1 months

Oh, man! You guys got me so frustrated I can't remember the code!

Tony Johnson
Tony Johnson 1 months

Or what, they'll beat you or something. 🤣

John 1 months

And so begins another episode of Americans lost liberties the republican edition

Robert_Clearwater 1 months

No law in America can compel an individual to speak or to write or to communicate. A warrant allows for the entrance into private property and extraction of a specified item, not that a citizen must begin spilling his guts. A warrant cannot compel me to move my body in a prescribed manner, whether it be forcing me to write something down or speak or play charades, there is no such thing as a writ of compulsory movement.

GreenMachine 1 months

F*cking Jersey. Most over taxes, intrusive,nanny state in the Union.

Edward Williams
Edward Williams 1 months


Bulwark AC
Bulwark AC 1 months

If the police can not make you unlock a briefcase then they can not make you open your phone.

TexasReb 1 months

This ruling won't last.

Top in Tech