content: The real scary part is that these are not the "throw away the laws, do whatever is right" guys here.  These are the lawmen doing this.  This is a very targeted type of finding, one that is meant to be safe.  In this case, they are using the fact that they "know" that the data exists.  This finding is crafted to chip away just a small part of the fifth amendment, not remove it totally, and the scary part is that these judges think that is a reasonable thing to do.  That's the bad part- the fact that this sort of attack is universally recognized as safe and wise in judicial circles.    I would assume that a competent lawyer would be able to argue that if the government KNOWS he has contraband, they should be able to convict him on that.  Since they obviously can't, then they don't know that fact, therefore he's being forced to testify against himself.  I think the 3-0 ruling is in part because the guy is obviously guilty, but that's not really the point here- once the fifth amendment stops existing for criminals, it stops existing period.    Note that this isn't the only, or the definitive, law in this case.  The EFF has been following these types of cases for years.  The ones that they go forward on are almost always dudes with child porn, who are despised so utterly, and whose cases are disturbing and impolite enough, that not only are they successful at chipping away at the constitution, they are doing so in a way that not many people want to talk about because it isn't a fun conversation at dinner.