Search and Seizure Clause

The Court Case project that I had worked on with my partner included a violation of the 4th amendment under the search and seizure clause. One of the cases was Safford Unified School District v Redding. To recap, a 13-year-old girl in school was strip-searched by the suspicion of drugs. After learning about this case and presenting it to the class, I wanted to know if there had been other incidents like this after the case. Not surprisingly, there had been something really similar to this in 2016. I stumbled upon the article, "Woman Who Said Officer Removed Her Tampon Will Recieve $205,000" https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/17/us/tampon-san-antonio.html .  The title says it all and is exactly what happened. A woman was sitting on a curb waiting for her boyfriend and the police had found her. They searched her by suspicion of drugs. The police first searched her car but didn't find anything so they searched her body. The police thought that her tampon was a drug at first but came to realize that it wasn't when they pulled it out of her body. She did have a record with drugs but this absolutely gives no reason for the police to search her body especially to that level. She was basically strip-searched like the 13-year-old from the case had been. She was recently paid $205,000 because her "dignity" had been taken away when the police had searched her. While reading this article, I questioned why did the police search her when she was only waiting for her boyfriend? Did it look suspicious because she was just chilling at a "curb"? If the police did find a drug where her tampon had been, the police wouldn't even be able to use it against her since they had found it illegally through violation of the 4th amendment.