To some, a federal court order demanding that Apple develop a way to give federal officials backend access to the iPhone of Syed Farook is strictly a matter of national security.
To others, it would set a dangerous precedent while potentially giving federal officials tools they could use to invade privacy in any instance they want.
Farook was one of the two suspects who died after killing over a dozen people at his place of work last December. Investigators say he and his wife, Tashfeen Malik, had ties to the Islamic State.
So far, Apple has refused to comply with the order, citing, among other things, privacy concerns.
At a U.S. House Appropriations Subcommittee hearing Thursday, Congressman David Jolly (R—Indian Shores) argued that the national security aspect takes precedence.
"This is a court order applying to one phone, and Apple is refusing to comply with that order," Jolly said. "Frankly, if their failure to comply means that there is additional information out there that has already contributed to other incidents or will in the future contribute to other incidents of terrorism or national security, I think Apple risks having blood on their hands."
The issue also came up during Thursday night's Republican presidential debate. Most appeared to have similar views, though Texas Senator Ted Cruz suggested that government require Apple to develop a key that would only work on Farook's iPhone.
"This is not my iPhone you're trying to look at," he said. "This is the iPhone of Syed Farook, who I believe is an individual who gave up every single one of his civil liberties on the day he killed 14 Americans and injured 21."
Jolly said Apple CEO Tim Cook is "wrong on this one."
"I am sick and tired of people in this town and across the country not siding with law enforcement," Jolly said. "And in this case that includes Apple and that includes Tim Cook."
This article appears in Feb 25 – Mar 2, 2016.