\u201cNasal swab testing for COVID-19 does not create an intrusion under the skin, does not involve any genetic testing, and there is no use of the sample for law enforcement purposes. Accordingly, the Court finds that Gold is unlikely to succeed on his Fourth Amendment claim. See Streight v. Pritzker, No. 3:21-cv-50339, 2021 WL 4306146 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 22, 2021) (denying preliminary injunction because plaintiff had not shown that Fourth Amendment challenge to university policy requiring vaccination or saliva testing to attend in-person classes was likely to succeed on the merits).\u201d Gold v. Sandoval, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 231678 (D.Ariz. Dec. 3, 2021).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant\u2019s consent was voluntary. The officers spoke in conversational terms. United States v. Reese, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 231782 (N.D.Ga. Oct. 28, 2021).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There was reasonable suspicion from text messages for defendant\u2019s probation search. United States v. Schaefer, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 231834 (D.S.D. Dec. 2, 2021).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\u201cNasal swab testing for COVID-19 does not create an intrusion under the skin, does not involve any genetic testing, and there is no use of the sample for law enforcement purposes. Accordingly, the Court finds that Gold is unlikely to … Continue reading