You sound like Thomas Jefferson -- TJ's opinion was similar. The courts are supposed to face impeachment by Congress. But until that happens, yes, what they say is legal.

Alas, it isn't an illegal search. Federal courts just upheld again yesterday that it is a legal search without a warrant:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/...

"Where does this end? Not being allowed to have a password?"
You're already not allowed to have a lock on your luggage. Those used to be standard. So, yes, a ban on locked devices is completely plausible.

The right to return is a US citizen's right, enshrined in law. There is no "back you go" for a US citizen... CBP either have to arrest you or grant you entry.

That's actually in the law that established Customs and Border Patrol. "Supposed to" meaning "they should follow the law and harrass people because that is the law."

Many crimes are committed by our government, but this is one where the law directs them to be abusive. We'd need new law for this to be a crime.

US has claimed jurisdiction over large parts of the globe at various points. Expats paying taxes while living overseas, rights to arrest foreign leaders, rights to all the oil in a region... US law enforcement has jurisdiction wherever US military and economic strength render non-compliance a non issue.

If he said, "This password unlocks my phone," that's a true statement. The phone was indeed unlocked and can be used as a phone.

Thomas Jefferson's complaint about the SCOTUS: "The constitution is nothing but a ball of wax in the hands of the judiciary." A SCOTUS ruling means no, you don't have those rights. Under our constitution, rights only go as far as judiciary says they go. Doesn't matter if SCOTUS made it up. The check on the judiciary is Congress impeaching the justices. That ain't happening.

Federal courts ruled yesterday that warrants are not needed at the border.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/...
We have no rights until we are well inside US borders.

Their primary duty is to keep out anyone the president deems undesirable. Unless I've misunderstood?

Courts confirmed just this month that you have no rights at the border for search/seizure. No warrant needed.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/...

Assume it was AI generated. It was prompted by a human and a human chose to share it. Curation is a human artwork. The choice to share is the human connection.

If it were that easy, companies would have far fewer problems with job interviews.

Oral exams hit their own problems of tester bias. In engineering, women tend to do worse on oral exams than written. That had been chalked up to just differences in learning styles, but I heard that an investigation at my university found it was the way instructors phrased questions or pressured for answers that changed. So you need someone giving the oral exams who is trained to ask the questions the same way -- except that standardization is exactly what makes oral exams better... you can probe for what the student actually knows.

There are no good objective answers to the subjective question of what does a student know.

THIS. I had pounded out so many for loops. And the opportunity to solve actually hard algorithm and data structure problems were few and far between. This has given new life to my career by taking out all the stuff I have typed a thousand times. I focus on the unique issues that LLM does not do as well with.