"With good reason, the people of the United States -- through judges and law enforcement -- can invade our private spaces," So, get a warrant and shut up!
And what good will a search warrant do, when the only person capable of unlocking the device will plead the fifth? What can a wiretap warrant do against end-to-end encryption? Let's try not to be intellectually dishonest here, to use a familiar analogy here if DRM prevents you from exercising fair use it's as if that right doesn't exist. A warrant that can't be exercised is nothing, pretending that we don't understand that doesn't lead to a honest discussion.
This isn't technically new, common folks have had the capability to lock everyone out since at least PGP and Bestcrypt back in 1991 and 1995, respectively. I actually expected a big clash over unbreakable encryption more than a decade ago, but using it was technical, inconvenient and complicated so it never became popular. So the police silently cursed it instead of drawing attention to it as it would only point out the police's blind spots.
Fast forward 20 years and through increased computing power, hacking and abuse it's finally going mainstream with companies starting to make regular consumer products so strong and convenient common people do it. And since it's happening anyway, the police are now making a big stink about it. Warrants have lived like a shade of gray, they don't have total and random access and it's not none whatsoever. I still think technology will force our hand to pick black or white.
There's certainly downsides to both no privacy and absolute privacy. People are going to want to have their cake and eat it too, some kind of happy middle like most people prefer a free and democratic nation instead of anarchy or totalitarianism. I mean to me it's rather obvious what's the lesser evil, but to be honest I'm glad the police can still kick down real world doors if necessary. The world would look quite differently if we had impenetrable fortresses one and all.