Marcus C. Ingram v. Warden Israel Hamilton; Sgt. D. Squier

Summary

The Fourth Circuit affirmed the grant of qualified immunity to prison officials sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 over a policy requiring visual strip searches of inmates before and after video visitation. The court assumed without deciding that some searches may have violated the Fourth Amendment but held that the right was not clearly established at the time. The court did not reach supervisory liability because it affirmed qualified immunity.

Holdings

1. The Fourth Circuit applies the Bell v. Wolfish balancing test, rather than the Turner v. Safley test, to determine whether a sexually invasive inmate search violates the Fourth Amendment.
2. The court assumed without deciding that some of the strip searches, particularly the redundant searches after video visits, were unreasonable and therefore unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment.
3. The alleged right to be free from the challenged repeated strip-search policy was not clearly established in the Fourth Circuit or by a consensus of persuasive authority; therefore, the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the blanket policy requiring visual strip searches before and after each video visitation was unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment.
2. Whether the alleged Fourth Amendment right violated by the policy was clearly established at the time of the searches, defeating qualified immunity.
3. Whether the district court properly granted summary judgment on qualified-immunity grounds.

Disposition

affirmed