Apple reiterates helping FBI unlock San Bernardino shooter’s iPhone would be illegal

Reiterating its stand in its dispute with the FBI over unlocking a killer's iPhone, Apple argued again in court papers that its hand to help federal officials access the phone would be illegal and dangerous.

The filing in US District Court in Riverside comes as the latest development in a high-stakes struggle over the encrypted iPhone used by Syed Rizwan Farook, one of two assailants who attacked the Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino on 2 December, killing 14 and leaving many more wounded.

According to officials, the killings by Farook and his wife, Tashfeen Malik, were an act of terrorism.

The case had emerged as a battleground in a larger dispute among elected officials, law enforcement and technology executives over how far companies could go in aiding criminal investigations.

With the filing of several briefs on both sides,  and also a hearing in front of US magistrate judge Sheri Pym set of next week, attorneys for Apple took another swipe at the case US attorney Eileen Decker's office had made.

The fight was centred around the All Writs Act, a sweeping, centuries-old law intended to provide judges the authority to issue orders when other avenues were not available. According to prosecutors, the act provided a solid legal foundation for Pym's order that Apple write new software to let FBI agents to circumvent security features built into the iPhone used by Farook.

Addressing attendees at the annual tech conference South by Southwest Interactive in Austin, Texas on Friday, President Obama asked for help getting Americans more civically engaged, but also spoke for the first time at length about issues in the dispute between the justice department and Apple over a terrorist's iPhone.

Since February, Apple and the justice department had been at odds, over a federal magistrate judge's order, which asked Apple to write special software to  help the FBI access an iPhone used by one of the shooters in the San Bernandino attacks. Apple had challenged the magistrate's order.