A bit meta, but the abstract employs a very interesting rhetorical device: "An assertion of privilege should be sustained unless the government can independent

A bit meta, but the abstract employs a very interesting rhetorical device: "An assertion of privilege should be sustained unless the government can independently show that the suspect knows the password." On the surface it almost looks like it argues for the opposite position by using the "Always do A unless exceptional conditions are met" form, but then guts that by making the "exceptional" condition pretty damn trivial.