Mobile menu toggle

Florida congressman floats stupid, anti-Apple bill

By

United States Capitol by Jens Junge
All the major tech companies are under investigation.
Photo: Jens June/Pixabay

Government officials seem to be in some kind of race to see which of them can be the most indignant and/or outraged at Apple’s refusal to create security-bypassing software for its devices. And we’re pretty sure Rep. David Jolly has just won.

Jolly, who represents Florida’s 13th District, submitted a bill Wednesday that would make it illegal for any federal office to own or lease Apple products until Cupertino gives in to the FBI’s demands. And he did so because state-sponsored blacklisting of organizations that legally disagree with the government is exactly how free countries work.

The bill, which Jolly calls the “No Taxpayer Support for Apple Act” (HR 4663), gets right to it. Here is its full text:

No agency or other entity within the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Federal Government may purchase any product manufactured by, licensed by, or otherwise sold under the trademark of Apple Inc. of 1 Infinite Loop, Cupertino, California (hereafter referred to “Apple”) until a court of Federal jurisdiction certifies that Apple has provided the Federal Government with the technical support necessary to access encrypted information sought by a judicial warrant that may be materially relevant to the investigation of commission of terrorism.

Not only is the anti-Apple bill a bad idea, but it’s very poorly worded. For one thing, it doesn’t specify which investigation the federal judge has to sign Apple’s report card on before the government can buy iPads again. We know he means the current case involving December’s mass shooting in San Bernardino, California, and the FBI’s demand that Apple break into the dead shooter’s iPhone.

And Jolly surely knows that’s what he means. But the bill has no idea. If it passed — which it won’t, because it reads more like hollow, election-year grandstanding than legislation — it would be impossible to enforce.

“Taxpayers should not be subsidizing a company that refuses to cooperate in a terror investigation that left 14 Americans dead on American soil,” Jolly said in a statement. “Following the horrific events of September 11, 2001, every citizen and every company was willing to do whatever it took to side with law enforcement and defeat terror. It’s time Apple shows that same conviction to further protect our nation today.”

Jolly joins the county attorney’s office of Maricopa County, Arizona, which entered the “We’re the maddest at Apple” contest by announcing it would no longer issue Apple products for office use. Maricopa County prosecutor Bill Montgomery said Apple had put itself “on the side of terrorists instead of on the side of public safety.”

  • Subscribe to the Newsletter

    Our daily roundup of Apple news, reviews and how-tos. Plus the best Apple tweets, fun polls and inspiring Steve Jobs bons mots. Our readers say: "Love what you do" -- Christi Cardenas. "Absolutely love the content!" -- Harshita Arora. "Genuinely one of the highlights of my inbox" -- Lee Barnett.

12 responses to “Florida congressman floats stupid, anti-Apple bill”

  1. Garrett Fahey says:

    Florida being Florida, again.

  2. DrMuggg says:

    What a stupid AHole.

  3. GaelicSoxFan says:

    I bet he was elected on a “small government” platform

  4. NitzMan says:

    People like these whom don’t understand the consequences of such a decision will only learn from experiencing a breach in privacy. This Jolly guy deserves to be hacked, have his life ruined, just so he can learn what a backdoor can let in.

  5. Diego says:

    You can’t force someone to not buy what they like.

  6. marcintosh says:

    Right, because government employees are the people whose phones we want to hack! Why should our government have secure communications? What a jackhole. /eye roll/

  7. digitaldumdum says:

    “Florida Congressman floats stupid, anti-Apple bill”

    From the state that gave us dumbos Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio and Rick Scott.

  8. josephz2va says:

    Only thing I understood out of that in plain English: “The Government may not own or lease an Apple Product and must surrender their property to IT” Not the federal employees, but the Government. And I’m guessing as well that they will only approve Blackberries with crackable security and Programmable Phones.

  9. Bob Forsberg says:

    A prime example of government types attempting to control free enterprise because they don’t agree with the protection of our privacy….and they wonder why Apple is digging in?

Leave a Reply