Can't they just convert a "true" input to backend to uppercase
Meanwhile, the actual inventor of the Segway:
In 2007, his residence was a hexagonal, shed style mansion he dubbed Westwind,[14] located in Bedford, New Hampshire, just outside Manchester. The house has at least four levels and is very eclectically conceived, with such things as: hallways resembling mine shafts; 1960s novelty furniture; a collection of vintage wheelchairs; spiral staircases; at least one secret passage; an observation tower; a fully equipped machine shop; and a huge cast iron steam engine which once belonged to Henry Ford (built into the multi-story center atrium of the house) which Kamen is working to convert into a Stirling engine-powered kinetic sculpture.[citation needed] Kamen owns and pilots an Embraer Phenom 300 light jet aircraft[46] and three Enstrom helicopters, including a 280FX, a 480, and a 480B.[47][48][49] He regularly commutes to work via his helicopters and had a hangar built into his house.[50] In 2016 he flew as a passenger in a B-2 Spirit bomber at Whiteman AFB, marking the opening of the 2016 FRC World Championship in St. Louis.[51]
A 2-1 circuit split means that the 2 currently prevails, thus making border searching of electronics illegal unless you're within the 11th's jurisdiction (Florida, Georgia, Alabama, while the guy was arrested traveling to a Texas conference), no?
In 2014, the US Supreme Court issued its landmark ruling in Riley v. California, which held that law enforcement officials violated the Fourth Amendment when they searched an arrestee's cellphone without a warrant. The court explained, "Modern cell phones are not just another technological convenience. With all they contain and all they may reveal, they hold for many Americans 'the privacies of life.' The fact that technology now allows an individual to carry such information in his hand does not make the information any less worthy of the protection for which the Founders fought."[15]
In 2013, before Riley was decided, the Ninth Circuit court of appeals held that reasonable suspicion is required to subject a computer seized at the border to forensic examination. [...] In May of 2018, in U.S. v. Kolsuz, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals has held that it is unconstitutional for US border officials to subject visitors' devices to forensic searches without individualized suspicion of criminal wrongdoing.[22] Just five days later, in U.S. v. Touset, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals split with the Fourth and Ninth Circuits, ruling that the Fourth Amendment does not require suspicion for forensic searches of electronic devices at the border.[23] The existence of a circuit split is one of the factors that the Supreme Court of the United States considers when deciding whether to grant review of a case.[24]
because your eyes are covered in them