Yves here. It is a sad comment on what passes for rights in America that a law like this has to be proposed. Well-settled precedent is that you have no expectation of privacy in a public place, and that includes spots viewable from the street like your front yard. That additionally means that photographing or videoing someone in these locations is similarly protected under the First Amendment.
However, I do like the carve-out of making Federal employees individually liable. Even though the government would presumably cover their defense, they would be subject to discovery as well as the stress of being involved in litigation. So the chilling effect against bad conduct would be salutary.
Mind you, one has to think this has no chance of passing before the midterms. But assuming midterms, that equation could change considerably.
By Brett Wilkins, staff writer at Common Dreams. Originally published at Common Dreams
A pair of congressional Democrats on Monday introduced legislation that would protect the constitutional right to legally record federal agents and open the door to civil compensation for people whose rights have been violated.
Congressman Maxwell Frost of Florida and Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut introduced the Right to Record Act, which according to Frost’s office, “establishes the right to sue individual law enforcement agents if they violate First Amendment rights, including the right to record, observe, or peacefully protest.”
“The First Amendment defends the right to assemble, protest, and record government officials in public,” Frost said in a statement.
“That right has never been more important. In cases like the murders of Alex Pretti and Renee Good, officials and their allies tried to paint the victims as threats despite evidence showing otherwise,” the congressman said, referring to two people shot and killed during the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Operation Metro Surge anti-immigrant blitz in Minneapolis.
“Without firsthand recordings, those false narratives might have become the official story, which is why the Right to Record Act is so important,” Frost added. “It would protect the public’s ability to expose the truth without fear, giving individuals a legal path forward if an officer does violate their constitutional rights.”
In the same statement, Blumenthal said that “over the last year, I’ve investigated dozens of cases of Americans brutalized by agents of their own government, and across the board, video footage corroborated their testimony—showing the world what they experienced and making sure that justice was served.”
“Without recordings, we wouldn’t know the truth of what happened to Renee Nicole Good, Alex Pretti, Marimar Martinez, George Retes, and so, so many others,” the senator continued.
Martinez, a US citizen, was shot five times by a US Customs and Border Protection agent last October in Chicago while going to donate clothing to her church. Officer body camera footage showed that DHS officials—who labeled Martinez a “domestic terrorist”—lied about events leading up to the shooting.
Retes, who is also a US citizen, is an Iraq War veteran who was violently arrested last July during an immigration raid on his job site and subsequently jailed for three days.
“The right to bear witness has never been more important,” Blumenthal said in his statement Monday. “I’m proud to work with Congressman Frost on bicameral legislation that will strengthen the right to record, observe, and peacefully protest—creating real enforcement tools for the protections of the First Amendment that lay the foundation for our democracy.”
Recording federal law enforcement agents in public is protected First Amendment activity, as long as the recorder is not interfering with the officers’ duties. Federal courts have repeatedly upheld this right.
“The right to observe and record law enforcement is fundamental to our democracy,” Jenna Leventoff, senior policy counsel with the ACLU—which has endorsed the Right to Record Act—asserted Monday.
“We can’t hold our government accountable if we can’t see for ourselves what they’re doing in our communities,” she argued. “Observing and filming allows people to create an independent record, share information with their communities, and demand better from our government.”
“Protesting for what we believe in is a core American value, and observing and filming government activity can drive the protest movements that spark change,” Leventoff added. “All of these rights are squarely protected by the First Amendment, and we’re hopeful that Congress will codify them into law by enacting the Right to Record Act.”
A state legislature also has the ability to enact a right to bring a damages cause of action against a federal official for US constitutional rights violations, the so-called Converse 1983 law, explained in some detail by this University of Wisconsin Law School article.
https://statedemocracy.law.wisc.edu/our-work/state-created-damages-remedies-against-federal-officials
The article points out that at least four states, CA, Maine, Mass., and NJ, already have laws that authorize damages actions against federal officials for federal constitutional violations.
Very helpful, thanks!
Photography Is Not A Crime.
https://carlosmiller.com/pinac-is-dead-but-my-voice-remains-alive/
I found the actual verbiage (sorry if I missed a link above):
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/28216654-sil26705/
How would this law compare/contrast with the ‘qualified immunity’ charade? I could see the current SCOTUS ruling against this at the drop of a hat as they suck so bad.
I didn’t really see any language in the bill, but I’m no expert at reading them.
Laws are nice, however if the Government decides to ignore them things get dicey.
Ross was rewarded with more than $1MM from a go fund me and faces no charges, neither do the killers of Alex Pretti.
DHS has ignored court rulings more than 400 times and MarkWayne Mullins declined to say whether he would obey the orders of the courts when questioned by Congress.
The Trump regime has routinely violated International Law as well as Domestic law, there is some pushback that has had no discernable effect, yet.
It will be interesting to see how our Oligarchs react when it becomes clear that if there is no Law for the “Little People” there is no Law for them.
Oops.
An Oligarch, is not just someone with great wealth, but by definition uses that wealth to exert their desire and will by altering laws and modifying/creating institutions to ease and facilitate that will. So they do not need to wake up, they live that power daily. Also of note is although there is fierce competition amongst them, along dominion and historical dynastic lines, they also collaborate and enable each other when it suits. Although I hesitate to sound authoritative on this, nowhere is this more evident than around war, or looting at its end phase. I believe an older post here a while back described how the US and UK chemical majors got first access to the labs and filing cabinets in Germany’s chemical companies, not the war department, immediately after the surrender. They were able to leap ahead of one of their major competitors, and probably got a decades worth of IP, and move to market advantage from it. Obviously they benifits from the services of the PMC, and buying politicians outright. Witness this in OZ. Oligarchs and little people r not subject to the same laws, IMHO.
But assuming midterms, that equation could change considerably.
Alternatively, however, after the midterms “their” boys could become “our” boys and since “we” are wearing the jackboots now nothing will change.
Each wing of the Bird of State complains about the abuses of power committed by the other party when it’s in power, but neither wing makes any serious effort to rein in those powers when THEY are in power.
The MAGA sorts cheering on the ICE troopers now may have a change of heart when in a couple years it’s, say, President Newsom or Buttigeig at the helm.
But the idea of “just dial the whole thing back” just never enters the picture. Neither wing wants to restrain the power and abuse – they just want to be the ones dishing OUT the abuse. Which is in no small part because the abuse is good for fundraising by the party out of power….
I’m reminded of German Communist Party leader Ernst Thälmann who is supposed to have said “After Hitler, it’s our turn” after the party had spent years working with the Nazis to destroy the Weimar Republic.
Foolish people think that creating lawlessness and chaos will always be beneficial for them.