If you are referring to the law invoked in the Apple case (the All Writs Act), a company unable to comply does not face legal consequences. From Wikipedia:
&quot;In the case U.S. v. New York Telephone Co. 434 U.S. 159 (1977), the Supreme Court established a three-factor test for the admissible application of the All Writs Act: the party ordered to perform an action cannot be too far removed from the case, the government&#x27;s request cannot impose an undue burden on that party, and the party&#x27;s assistance is necessary.&quot;[1]<p>I&#x27;m not a lawyer (and law can be tricky), but forcing a company to do something impossible (breaking into a truly secure device) seems very clearly to be a &quot;undue burden&quot;. The real issue here is that Apple has created a device that is possible for them to backdoor themselves, and the clear solution is to remove that capability from future devices.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;All_Writs_Act#Conditions_for_use" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;All_Writs_Act#Conditions_for_u...</a>