Comment on this story
Comment
A new law in Arizona would make it illegal to film encounters with law enforcement from less than 8 feet away, except in certain circumstances, such as when the person recording is the one being questioned by authorities.
Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey (R) signed the bill Wednesday that would make it a crime to record police activity at close range after officers have issued a verbal warning.
Republican state Rep. John Kavanagh, who sponsored the bill, wrote in an op-ed in The Arizona Republic that the goal is to guard against distraction and potential harm, especially when police are involved in violent confrontations. He wrote that police told him that groups “hostile” to officers were following them around, taking pictures 1 to 2 feet behind them, which Kavanagh called “a dangerous practice that could end in tragedy.”
“I can think of no reason why any responsible person should come within 8 feet of a police officer engaged in a hostile or potentially hostile encounter.” Such an approach is unreasonable, unnecessary and dangerous and should be outlawed,” Kavanagh wrote in the commentary.
Are the police trying to stop you from taking this cell phone video? Check your First Amendment rights.
In an era where cellphone cameras have proven instrumental in capturing police encounters and holding law enforcement officers accountable, critics say the law limits people’s right to record in public.
“The total restriction is a violation of the First Amendment,” Stephen D. Solomon, director of New York University’s Arthur L. Carter Journalism Institute, which teaches First Amendment law, told The Washington Post.
More than 60 percent of the U.S. population lives in states — including Arizona — where federal appeals courts have recognized the First Amendment right to record police officers performing their duties in public, according to NYU’s First Amendment Citizen’s Guide to Police Recording Watch.
Solomon, editor of the online news site, said that was not an absolute right. There are some restrictions, such as reasonable time, place and manner limits, that courts can impose to prevent people from interfering with the police. But there is no set distance recognized by federal courts because it depends on the situation, he said.
“Who’s to say 8 feet is the right distance? It may be in some circumstances, but in other circumstances, no,” he said, questioning how such a law would be enforced amid a street demonstration where crowds of people with cellphones were surrounded by law enforcement officers.
Solomon said the new law would have a “chilling effect”.
“If you know the limit is 8 feet, you might stand 15 or 20 feet away, or you might not record at all because you’re worried the police will arrest you,” he said.
You have the right to photograph the police. Here’s how to do it effectively—and safely.
The law would allow some exceptions to the 8-foot rule, with caveats. For example, the bill states that when a police encounter occurs in an enclosed area on private property, a person authorized to be there can record closer than 8 feet — “unless a law enforcement officer determines that the person is interferes with law enforcement activity’ or is unsafe. The bill defines “law enforcement activity” as an officer questioning a suspect, an officer making an arrest, or an officer dealing with a situation involving an “emotionally disturbed or disturbed person.”
In addition, a person being questioned can record within 8 feet of the law enforcement officer and, during a traffic stop, the occupants of the vehicle can also record the encounter — as long as no one interferes with the “lawful conduct of the police,” such as a search, handcuffing, or field sobriety test.
The law will come into force in September.
Add Comment