In Aaron M. Ogletree v. Cleveland State University, the US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio granted summary judgment in favor of plaintiff finding that the university’s online testing procedures violated Mr. Ogletree’s rights under the Fourth Amendment. At issue was a camera scan of the bedroom of his residence in which Mr. Ogletree was testing and which was required by the test proctor prior to launching an online test. Such scans are common in online testing and are meant to discourage cheating.

Mr. Ogletree claimed that the required scan of his bedroom was an unreasonable search under the Fourth Amendment as applied to Cleveland State University via the Fourteenth Amendment. In its decision the Court applied the four-part special needs exception articulated in Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton, 515 U.S. 646. To determine if the Vernonia special needs exception applied, the Court examined: (1) the nature of the privacy interest affected; (2) the character of the intrusion; (3) the nature and immediacy of the government concern; and (4) the efficacy of this means of addressing the concern. The court found the university failed to meet its burden under the special needs exception.

Both the Ogletree and Vernonia cases were decided in the context of education. It will be interesting to see if a similar analysis applies to governmental instrumentalities testing in a noneducational context and if the four-part special needs exception articulated in Vernonia is applicable. A copy of the complaint can be found at: https://spelusolawoffice.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Aaron-M.-Ogletree-v.-Cleveland-State-University-2nd-Amended-Complaint.pdf. A copy of the court’s decision can be found at: https://spelusolawoffice.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Aaron-M.-Ogletree-v.-Cleveland-State-University-Summary-Judgment.pdf.