---
title: "The Constitution spells out the limits on _government_ power.  Any…"
date: 2017-10-11
source: facebook
type: Archer T. Ships shared a link.
---

# The Constitution spells out the limits on _government_ power.  Any…

*October 11, 2017 · Facebook*

::::: {}
::: {}
[https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/10/trumps-doj-tries-to-rebrand-weakened-encryption-as-responsible-encryption/](https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/10/trumps-doj-tries-to-rebrand-weakened-encryption-as-responsible-encryption/){target="_blank"}
:::

::: {}
The Constitution spells out the limits on \_government\_ power. Any power not specifically granted to the government is reserved to the people.\
\
So, Rosenstein has it exactly backward\--the people have the right to sell strong encryption unless and until the Constitution is amended to give the government the power to prohibit it.\
\
Of course, over time, government enthusiasts have vigorously advocated for absurdly broad interpretations of the scope of government power.\
\
For example, have you ever wondered why the Federal government had to pass a constitutional amendment to ban alcohol, but did not have to bother passing one to ban recreational drugs?\
\
That\'s because in the intervening years, the Supreme Court decided that the Interstate Commerce clause (which gives the federal government the power to regulate commerce between states), applied to growing grain on your own farm, for your own use, due to the fact that not buying grain on the open market affects national grain prices. (See [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v.\_Filburn](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn){target="_blank"} for more details.)\
\
A whole host a federal regulations rest on this tissue of sophistry.\
\
However, the original intent of the Constitution was to limit the power of the government, not the people.\
\-\-\-\--\
\
\"Rosenstein claimed that \"responsible encryption can protect privacy and promote security without forfeiting access for legitimate law enforcement needs supported by judicial approval.\" But he doubts that tech companies will do so unless forced to:\
\
\"Technology companies almost certainly will not develop responsible encryption if left to their own devices. Competition will fuel a mindset that leads them to produce products that are more and more impregnable. That will give criminals and terrorists more opportunities to cause harm with impunity.\"\
\
\"Allow me to conclude with this thought,\" Rosenstein said just before wrapping up his speech. \"There is no constitutional right to sell warrant-proof encryption.\"\
\
[https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/10/trumps-doj-tries-to-rebrand-weakened-encryption-as-responsible-encryption/](https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/10/trumps-doj-tries-to-rebrand-weakened-encryption-as-responsible-encryption/){target="_blank"}
:::
:::::