It definitely focuses on the digital signature, but the EFF is also arguing the expression of Apple's beliefs within the operating system should be protected by

It definitely focuses on the digital signature, but the EFF is also arguing the expression of Apple's beliefs within the operating system should be protected by the first amendment. >The Order is unconstitutional because it compels Apple to express itself in conflict with its stated beliefs. The Order forces Apple to say something it does not want to say and that it believes is “dangerous.” It then forces Apple to endorse code it does not want to endorse and thereby undermine the trust it has established in its digital signature. Each of these acts of compelled expression implicate the First Amendment independently, but together they are even more harmful, hindering Apple’s ability to communicate its desired messages to its users, and to the world, into the future.