Question: I had seen it before, those fuzzy, furry leaves and stalks, with the pretty, star-pointed purple flowers, but up until that moment that I saw them sitting in a basket at the market stalls, I admit I had never taken notice of it as a food. It grow along cracks in stone walls and along the roadside near my home in Settignano, which is blooming with spring goodness right now: robinia (black locust) trees, wild garlic (three-cornered leek) and even elderflowers are already bursting. I asked the vendor just to double check, “Is this borage?” “Si,” Came the answer, “Borragine.” He confirmed. “I’ve had it in ravioli,” I started to say, “Brava!” He said, as if we were about to start a guessing game on what could be done with it. Actually, there’s a lot that can be done with it. If you can use it as a ravioli filling with ricotta, then you can imagine it taking the place of spinach in gnudi, too, but also soups or frittata or stirred through polenta. I learned that the flowers are just as delicious, if not more interesting, for their delicate cucumber-like flavour — people told me of their use in salads or cocktails like Pimms, and someone even mentioned she freezes them in ice cubes, what a pretty idea for those first warm nights when you can dine al fresco, homemade cocktail in hand. Then there’s risotto and of course the fritters, much like these ones. Or you can simply deep fry the clusters of buds that haven’t yet burst open like these deep-fried robinia flowers. borage and ricotta crepes The problem, I was thinking, as I took home my bag of borage, is that I can’t decide what to make. There’s simply too much choice. I consulted two of my favourite books that also happen to be cookbooks. Patience Gray’s Honey from a Weed and Luigi Ballerini’s A Feast of Weeds. Both had wonderful ideas for borage (and indeed many other edible, foraged plants). Question: What is the author's favorite type of food? Options: - Italian food   - not enough information   - foraged food   - frozen food === The correct answer is
not enough information

The U.S. Supreme Court signaled Wednesday it may be open to new limits on the government's ability to track someone's movements by accessing data on that person's cellphone.  A case before the high court could result in a landmark decision in the ongoing debate over civil liberties protections in an era of rapid technological change.  At issue is whether law enforcement will be able to access cellphone data that can reveal a person's whereabouts without having to first obtain a court-issued search warrant.  The case stems from the conviction of Timothy Carpenter for a series of robberies back in 2010 and 2011. Prosecutors were able to obtain cellphone records that indicated his location over a period of months, information that proved crucial to his conviction. On Wednesday, lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union argued that law enforcement should be required to obtain a court-ordered search warrant before obtaining such information.  They also argued that allowing law enforcement to access the cellphone data without a warrant would violate the prohibition on unreasonable search and seizures contained in the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.  "It is impossible to go about our daily lives without leaving a trail of digital breadcrumbs that reveal where we have been over time, what we have done, who we spent time with," said ACLU attorney Nathan Freed Wessler, who spoke to reporters outside the Supreme Court following oral arguments. "It is time for the court, we think, to update Fourth Amendment doctrine to provide reasonable protections today."  Some of the justices also raised concerns about privacy in the digital age.  "Most Americans, I think, still want to avoid Big Brother," Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who often sides with the liberal wing of the court, said.  Chief Justice John Roberts, who often sides with conservatives on the court, said the central question was whether the cellphone information should be accessible to the government "without a warrant." Question: why would an entity need to obtain a warrant? Options: - not enough information   - to search records   - to arrest   - to leave for the day === The correct answer is
to search records

A school board in the eastern state of Virginia has filed an emergency appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court to halt a ruling that allows a transgender student to use the boys’ restroom next school year. The Gloucester County School Board is trying to prevent Gavin Grimm from using the bathroom that matches his gender identity when school resumes later this year, saying it will "put parents' constitutional rights in jeopardy.'' Grimm sued the school district last year for the right to use the boys’ restroom after the school board enacted a policy limiting bathroom use to the one corresponding with a person’s biological sex rather than the gender with which the student identifies. Grimm was born female but identifies as male. "Depriving parents of any say over whether their children should be exposed to members of the opposite biological sex, possibly in a state of full or complete undress, in intimate settings deprives parents of their right to direct the education and upbringing of their children,'' attorneys for the school board wrote. The ACLU, which is defending Grimm, has argued that forcing him to use the girls' bathroom is a violation of Title IX and the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The issue is one that has been hotly debated in schools, courts and state legislatures across the U.S. The Obama administration in May directed the nation’s public schools to allow transgender students to use bathrooms and locker rooms that match their gender identity or risk losing their federal funding. Twenty-one states have sued to overturn the directive. The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals sided with Grimm in April. The court reinstated Grimm's Title IX claim and sent it back to the district court for further consideration. The school board wants the Supreme Court to put Grimm's district court case on hold until the justices decide whether to review the appeals court decision. The board says it plans to file its petition for Supreme Court review by late August. Question: After the end of the text, the Supreme Court has probably Options: - ruminated on the issue   - decided the issue   - discussed the issue   - not enough information === The correct answer is

Answer: decided the issue