The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) announced Wednesday that it plans to challenge a recent ruling made by a federal court in Philadelphia arguing that the First Amendment doesn't always protect a citizen's right to record the activities of on-duty police officers.
The pending appeal relates to a ruling made by U.S. District Judge Mark A. Kearney, who said Wednesday that it is within an officer's power to stop any and all attempts at recording their activities unless the videographer announces that the recording was done as a challenge or protest to their actions, according to CBS Philadelphia.
In the 21-page ruling, Kearney referenced the Supreme Court's conclusion in 1984's Clark v. Community for Creative Nonviolence: "it is the obligation of the person desiring to engage in assertedly expressive conduct to demonstrate that the First Amendment even applies."
"While we instinctively understand the citizens' argument, particularly with rapidly developing instant image sharing technology, we find no basis to craft a new First Amendment right based solely on 'observing and recording' without expressive conduct," Kearney wrote.
The decision stems from two lawsuits filed in 2014. The first involved Amanda Geraci, a self-described "legal observer," who videotaped the arrest of a protester at a September 2012 anti-fracking rally. In her suit, she alleged that an officer attacked her when he physically restrained her and prevented her from using her camera.
The second involved Richard Fields, a Temple University junior, who, in 2015, took several photographs of 20 officers who were standing outside a local house party. In his suit, he alleged that police arrested him when he refused to leave and later cited him for obstructing a police investigation, reported Reuters. The court filings also indicate that his phone showed evidence of being tampered with prior to his release.
The ACLU objected to the decision, and in addition to revealing their intent to appeal, they argued that civilian video recordings of police is "essential" to holding officers accountable for their actions.
"Police have extraordinary power, and civilian recordings of police actions are essential to holding police accountable for how they use that power. The freedom to monitor the police without fearing arrest or retaliation is one of the ways we distinguish a free society from a police state. Every court that has addressed this issue has ruled that the right to record the police performing their duties in public is at the core of what the First Amendment protects. Judge Kearney's ruling is an outlier, and we intend to appeal it," Executive Director of the ACLU of Pennsylvania Reggie Shuford said on the group's website.
The ruling contradicts other rulings made elsewhere in the U.S., as the public's right to record police activity has been already deemed legal by courts in Boston, Chicago and Atlanta.
