the petitioners’ Fourth Amendment rights, the Supreme Court defined the parameters of the reasonableness inquiry in these kinds of cases: The test of reasonableness under the Fourth Amendment is not capable of precise definition or mechanical application. In each case it requires a balancing of the need for the particular search against the invasion of personal rights that the search entails. Courts must consider the scope of the particular intrusion, the manner in which it is conducted, the justification for initiating it, and the place in which it is conducted. Id. at 559, 99 S.Ct. 1861. Since the Court’s decision in Wolfish, the courts of appeals have addressed myriad strip search policies applied to arres-tees and detainees. See, e.g., Weber v. Dell, 804 F.2d 796 (2d Cir.1986)(<HOLDING>); Mary Beth G. v. City of Chicago, 723 F.2d
holding unconstitutional blanket jail policy of subjecting all arrestees to strip and visual body cavity searches holding that mandatory visual strip search policy in county jail was unconstitutional holding probable cause to be required for strip and visual body cavity searches holding that prison officials may conduct visual body cavity searches in a reasonable manner holding unconstitutional city policy of subjecting all females arrested and detained to strip and visual body cavity searches