The courts are trying to say that the Fifth Amendment only applies to witnesses. They're deliberately misleading the people in this case. The fifth amendment cl

The courts are trying to say that the Fifth Amendment only applies to witnesses. They're deliberately misleading the people in this case. The fifth amendment clearly states "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." Note the "nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself" telling him to decrypt that hard drive is still in effect forcing him to be a witness against himself. These judges saying the fifth amendment doesn't apply should be sued for constitutional violations.