> Officers may not intentionally use the device to access information that is solely stored remotely.
Probably until some court rules that a client making the information seem local to facilitate access is legally equivalent to having that information local (and hence not under protection of 5.1.2).
Most likely followed later by some other ruling that a browser can be considered such a client.
Doesn't 5.1.2 mean that the device would be without network access throughout the search (regardless of what information is meant to be protected as stored remotely)?
Probably until some court rules that a client making the information seem local to facilitate access is legally equivalent to having that information local (and hence not under protection of 5.1.2).
Most likely followed later by some other ruling that a browser can be considered such a client.