As Judge Bork said during his confirmation hearings for the SCOTUS, there is no right to privacy in the Constitution. Of course, we all know that in practice, a certain amount of privacy is protected. The one over-reaching element, however, is a court order. I have yet to see a statement regarding privacy policies in which the condition, "or as required by law," is not included.
It is well established law that with a proper court order, the government can probe and examine your own body for evidence, including using invasive procedures. Why should it not be able to examine an electronic device carried in your hand? The present case will be a long battle, but destruction of evidence, even if that evidence cannot be shown to have putative value is still against the law. If it goes to the Supreme Court, the arguments will be quite interesting.
John