The 3rd, 4th, and 5th amendments say otherwise. While you&#x27;re right in the narrow implication-following sense, you&#x27;re wrong in the general big-picture sense. Similar to how the 4th amendment was broken with mass adoption of the automobile, and the 6th&#x2F;7th were broken by commercial law (have you ever been able to get a jury trial for a speeding ticket?)<p>In the past, ephemeral day-to-day communications <i>were not</i> accessible to the courts, because they were carried out face to face. These days, those same communications are carried out electronically. Similarly with storage - due to the complexity brought on by computers, there is simply much more to correctly remember in today&#x27;s world, necessitating the use of auxiliary storage for one&#x27;s brain.<p>The attack on encryption is a direct attack on whether individuals&#x27; computers should function as their personal agents (akin to lawyer and priest professional confidentiality), or whether individuals are prevented from personally wielding the amplifying power of computation and left at the mercy of powerful groups who do.