Studentry v. LetsGetChecked
73 U.Va 12 (2020)
Calamaro, J., writing for the majority.
This Court, in its long, illustrious history, has never dealt with one issue that affects nearly every consumer—online advertising. At issue, here, is whether LetsGetChecked, the company through which our studentry is required to test for COVID-19, can send me, a justice on this court, an ad for Lyme disease testing services. This Court, in all its wisdom, is answering with a resounding “no” for the following reasons:
I.
The solicitous and purposeless email ads distract from useful ones from the Law School like “The Docket” or infrequent updates from the registrar.
Who among us doesn’t wake up looking forward to “The Docket” every morning? “The Docket” is so useful, with things like headshots for the same rotation of professors, or a student who I definitely and totally know and care about. Getting your name in “The Docket” is absolutely not an exercise in self-aggrandizement, which no one will remember after clicking through to the next email. No, “The Docket” is simply meant to help us recognize the importance of what these professors are achieving—be it an analysis on burning issues like justices making corrections to their opinions, or on unexplored, novel areas such as what Justice Barrett will do to shape the Supreme Court’s opinions. Without “The Docket,” I wouldn’t know where my tuition loans are going, and now that I do, I absolutely think every professor featured on there is worth every single penny of it.
The issue with LetsGetChecked sending me solicitations in my UVA email is that I don’t get to see “The Docket.” Who has the time for both? I also lose out on seeing other important publications, like VIRGINIA Magazine or This Week in Public Service, the latter of which encourages me to share my Barbri subscription with public service people (PSPs).[1] Why can’t LetsGetChecked go the same route as our school administration has with regard to class sign-ups? Just say nothing to me until it’s the last second for me to get a test—that’s what the registrar would do.
The point is, I get inundated with incredibly timely and useful emails from the university, and the last thing that I want to do is find an excuse to never look at my university email again. This is what happens if we continue to get LetsGetChecked email ads. In the process of ignoring a LetsGetChecked ad, I may end up accidentally skipping an all-important and clearly-written email from the registrar on how to sign up for classes. That is unacceptable, and brings us to our next point…
II.
LetsGetChecked triggers test anxiety by telling people to get a test.
As a law student, the last thing that I need to remember is that I have a test coming up in the next few weeks. LetsGetChecked has made the cardinal sin of doing just that. It reminds me of a responsibility to my own personal health, which, as a law student, is something that I do not enjoy thinking about. Furthermore, the last thing that I need is a Lyme disease test. I am a law student, so I don’t go outside except to look for people to sue, and I only have enough capacity to worry about one government-lab-made disease released by accident into the wild, and Lyme is not it. The only bloodsuckers I need to worry about are the opposing counsel and people who ask questions at the end of class.
Additionally, no test should be advertised as pass/fail, positive/negative at this moment in time. Unless the administration is willing to allow for pass/fail tests in our classes, I don’t want to be reminded of the fact that I may have to suffer through a Lyme scare and a graded class. LetsGetChecked is callous to this fact. Rather than refraining from advertising at all, it has decided that it would advertise a test that I assume provides a binary Lyme/Lemon result.
III.
Remedies: The School should provide one million dollars to students who receive solicitations from LetsGetChecked. In lieu of that, the School should give students free cookies and coffee.
The school, in requiring students to sign up for testing through the LetsGetChecked company, also effectively mandated that students sign their precious data over to said company. However, no compensation has been made to students for their efforts. This data alone is worth probably, like, $1,000,000. If the Law School is unwilling to compensate students for the data they have so painstakingly shared with LetsGetChecked, it should, at the very least, provide free cookies to students on occasion. Specifically, it should do so on Fridays, and maybe provide free coffee as well.
It is so ordered.
Tonseth, concurring.
An inevitable consequence of LetsGetChecked’s rogue actions is that “your DNA can be taken and entered into a national DNA database . . . for whatever reason.”[2] It is foolish to believe that the Fourth Amendment has not been affected by the advance of technology,[3] and this case is no different. While the DNA collection by LetsGetChecked was necessary for COVID-19 clearance, the continued use by LetsGetChecked is constitutionally undermining the rights of citizens to “feel secured in their persons.”[4]
Although most of my fellow Justices find my textualist tendencies abrasive, in this instance, the strict adherence to the Fourth Amendment is critical to ensure both bodily and mental integrity.[5]
---
dac6jk@virginia.edu
pjt5hm@virginia.edu
[1] I will not. They made their choice.
[2] Maryland v. King, 133 U.S. (Scalia, dissenting).
[3] Kyllo v. United States, 53 U.S. 27
[4] Maryland v. King, 133 U.S. (Scalia, dissenting).
[5] I dissent from the majority's insinuation that public service students don’t need free things. Justice Calamaro sounds mighty uppity for someone almost $200,000 in debt...