U.S. Court Rules it Can’t Force Defendant to Hand Over His Password

• Pennsylvania court decides not to compel a suspect of child pornography to provide his PC password.
• The reasoning of the ruling is that password sharing is a testimonial act, and thus it is protected under the Constitution.
• Defendants retain the right to avoid self-incrimination, according to the Fifth Amendment.

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has ruled that suspects shouldn’t be forced to provide their passwords, as this action would violate their civil rights and liberties. The particular case concerns defendant Joseph J. Davis, who is accused of holding and distributing underage pornographic material. Obviously, digging into the man’s computer would clear the fog, helping the authorities determine whether he is involved in child pornography or not. However, the Supreme Court Judge, Debra Todd, decided that compelling the man to hand over his password would violate his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.

Davis has previously admitted that child porn is hidden in his PC, but he hasn’t voluntarily offered the password to unlock the device and locate the evidence. The Judge pointed to the federal Supreme Court precedent where defendants didn’t provide the combination to unlock a wall safe, and they couldn’t be forced to do so. These cases that the court sees as similar, constitute verbal communication testimonials, which is entirely different from being compelled to physical acts such as providing a blood sample for example. Testimonies are protected under the Constitution, so the defendant retains the right to avoid self-incrimination.

While this is a case of child pornography, a crime that hits our society’s chords (and for good reasons), the court’s decision was greeted by advocacy groups like the Electronic Frontier Foundation. EFF celebrates the decision that could help protect people’s privacy rights on the court, even if this means that a pedophile would getaway in this particular case. As the non-profit organization points out, the governments shouldn’t be able to force people to reveal highly personal information or drop them into a position that goes against a court order. The Pennsylvania ruling paves the way to freedom for suspects, who are allowed to take their own decision on what to reveal.

Still, the court was divided due to the special circumstances and the accompanying evidence, and the decision was very marginal (4 to 3). Now, the baton passes to the Supreme Courts of Indiana and New Jersey, both of which are dealing with similar cases at this time. These two will now play a crucial role in how U.S. courts correlate the forceful testimonials with the Fifth Amendment rights, and either solidify Debra Todd’s ruling or dispute it.

Do you agree with the Pennsylvania court decision, or should pedophiles be forced to hand over passwords no matter what? Let us know where you stand in the comments section down below, or on our socials, on Facebook and Twitter.