In its ongoing battle with Apple over privacy rights, the United States Justice Department has asked a higher judge in the Eastern District of New York (EDNY) to revisit its request to have a drug-dealer's iPhone unlocked under the All Writs Act. The previous judge sided strongly with Apple, who provided iMore with the following comment:

"Judge Orenstein ruled the FBI's request would 'thoroughly undermine fundamental principles of the Constitution' and we agree," said Apple. "We share the Judge's concern that misuse of the All Writs Act would start us down a slippery slope that threatens everyone's safety and privacy."

According to Reuters:

In its filing on Monday, the Justice Department cited the California decision as evidence that the All Writs Act has been used to compel Apple to unlock the phones.

"Meanwhile, in the Central District Court of California on February 16, 2016, the government obtained an All Writs Act order requiring Apple to assist law enforcement in accessing the phone of one of the shooters involved in the mass murders in San Bernardino, California," lawyers for the Justice Department said in the filing.

All of this to show that, despite what the FBI keeps saying, it's not at all about "one iPhone" but about law enforcement using the courts instead of the legislature to gain access to encrypted data.

That Apple — now with the support of many other major technology companies — rather than legislatures are the ones fighting this on our behalf is something that should not be lost on anyone.

Even the world's largest company can be an underdog, and one in a fight that everyone who believes in security and privacy desperately needs them to win.

Do you believe the original judge was correct in his ruling? Let me know!