Comment A new Arizona law would make it illegal to videotape law enforcement encounters from less than 8 feet away, except in certain cases, 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 misdemeanor 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 purpose is to protect against distraction and potential harm, particularly when police are involved in violent confrontations. He wrote that police told him that groups “hostile” to officers follow them, filming 1 to 2 feet behind them, which Kavanagh called “a dangerous practice that can end in tragedy.” “I can think of no reason why anyone in charge would need to get closer than 8 feet to an officer involved in a hostile or potentially hostile encounter. Such an approach is unreasonable, unnecessary and unsafe and should be made illegal,” Kavanagh wrote in the article. Are the police trying to stop you from taking this cell phone video? Check your First Amendment rights. At a time when cellphone cameras have proven instrumental in recording police encounters and holding law enforcement officers accountable, critics say the law limits people’s right to record in public places. “A blanket restriction is a violation of the First Amendment,” Stephen D. Solomon, director of the Arthur L. Carter Journalism Institute at New York University, who teaches First Amendment law, told the Washington Post. More than 60 percent of the U.S. population lives in states — including Arizona — in which federal appeals courts have recognized the First Amendment right to record police officers performing their duties in public, according to a citizen’s guide to police recording by NYU’s First Amendment Watch. Solomon, editor of the online news site, said it is not an absolute right. There are certain restrictions, such as reasonable time, place and manner restrictions, 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 under some circumstances, but under other circumstances, no,” he said, wondering how such a law would be enforced amid street protests where crowds of people with cellphones are surrounded by police. Solomon said the new law would have a “chilling effect”. “If you know the limit is 8 feet, you might stay 15 or 20 feet away, or you might not record at all because you’re worried the police will take you into custody,” he said. You have the right to film 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 a distance of less than 8 feet — “unless a law enforcement officer determines that the person is interfering in law enforcement activity’ or unsafe. In the bill, “law enforcement activity” is defined as an officer questioning a suspicious person, an officer making an arrest, or an officer handling a situation involving “an emotionally disturbed or disorderly person.” Additionally, a person being questioned can record within 8 feet of a law enforcement officer, and during a traffic stop, the vehicle’s occupants can also record the encounter — as long as no one is interfering with “lawful police actions, such as an investigation , handcuffs or conducting a field sobriety test. The law will come into effect in September.
