Judge Steven C. Frucci ruled this week that it does not violate the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution to compel a criminal defendant to unlock a cellphone with a fingerprint. Whereas unlocking with a pass code requires the defendant to provide personal knowledge, a fingerprint is not considered testimonial because it is biometric information similar to a DNA sample.
The move towards fingerprint secured cellphones was with the goal of providing more security to the owner. This ruling however indicates that while the advanced technology provides more security, it may not provide more privacy.
Read more at: Police can require cellphone fingerprint, not pass code.