\u201cPlaintiff argues any COVID-19 testing requirement is subject to the reasonable suspicion standards under the Fourth Amendment. … However, the Proclamation does not contain or implicate a testing requirement. … Therefore, Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment claim is without merit. Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate there are serious questions going to the merits of his Fourth Amendment claim, and that he is likely to succeed on those questions of merit.\u201d Jensen v. Biden, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 224094 (E.D.Wash. Nov. 19, 2021).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cUnder Johnson’s version of events, Johnson’s arrest was effected and he was fully secured, not resisting, and not posing a threat when Officer Aguila gratuitously and forcibly struck him in his face. After review of the evidence and videos in the light most favorable to Johnson, and with the benefit of oral argument, we conclude that the district court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of the Defendants. Therefore, we reverse.\u201d Johnson v. City of Miami Beach<\/a>, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 34507 (11th Cir. Nov. 19, 2021).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" \u201cPlaintiff argues any COVID-19 testing requirement is subject to the reasonable suspicion standards under the Fourth Amendment. … However, the Proclamation does not contain or implicate a testing requirement. … Therefore, Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment claim is without merit. Plaintiff has … Continue reading