> They have databases...fancy filing cabinets. Just because the company is famous shouldn't preclude their filing cabinets from being searched (presuming legal processes are used and not abused).
That analogy doesn't work, because the "filing cabinets" are actually sitting somewhere else, possibly in another country/continent. It's not obvious that authorities in one country has authority over documents stored in another country.
I think it is not crazy to think that if the contents are used from some country then intentional obstruction of justice stuff like kill switches or dropping VPN connections should be treated as intentional obstruction of justice. AKA reality of use matters more than "location" of data.
