An anonymous reader writes "The US government has entered its reply brief in the US vs. Wurie case and its argument in favor of warrantless searches of arrestees' cell phones contains some truly terrible suppositions.
The government argues that impartial technological advancements somehow favor criminals. As it sees it, the path to the recovery of evidence should not be slowed by encryption or wiping or even the minimal effort needed to obtain a warrant. The police are presented as forever behind the curve, despite evidence otherwise. Without a doubt, there's an ongoing arms race between deletion technology and recovery technology, but the gap between the two isn't nearly as large as the government portrays it.
Specific reasons that evidence might be relevant sounds a whole lot like the sort of things that would be present on a warrant request. Except in this case, the officer would have the luxury of arguing that after searching the phone. It's like asking for warrant after tossing the house. But the government's not done. It goes farther and attempts to portray warrants as the actual enemy of the Fourth Amendment.
The government views the Fourth Amendment as little more than a criminal's best friend. This is the entity that is supposed to protect civil liberties, not argue them away as pesky impediments to the pursuit of bad guys"
Link to Original Source