Must Defendants Unlock Their Cellphones? What The Law Says

The issue of whether defendants are required to unlock their cellphones has become increasingly significant in light of recent cases, such as the FBI’s search of New York City Mayor Eric Adams' personal phone. While agents were unable to access the phone due to a forgotten passcode, the case highlights the broader legal debate over compelled access to digital devices.

Courts have generally upheld the use of biometric data, like fingerprints or facial recognition, to unlock phones, ruling that these methods do not violate Fifth Amendment protections because they are considered non-testimonial. However, the use of biometric features is not without controversy, as some courts view compelling a defendant to unlock their phone with biometric data as being similar to forcing them to reveal a passcode, which could raise self-incrimination concerns. 

When it comes to being compelled to unlock a phone with a passcode, the courts are divided. Some courts view providing a passcode as a form of self-incrimination, arguing that revealing it would compel the defendant to testify against themselves, while others apply the “foregone conclusion” doctrine, arguing that the passcode’s existence and the individual’s knowledge of it can be compelled without violating constitutional rights.

As technology evolves and legal challenges continue to unfold, the question of whether defendants can be compelled to unlock their cellphones remains a critical issue, one that will likely require further resolution by higher courts to balance privacy rights against law enforcement needs.  This article discusses the law across the country on this topic which includes an easily accessible chart.