Arizona State Senator John Kavanagh announced Sept. 16 that the Republican leaders of the Arizona Legislature would not try to defend the law he sponsored that restricts the filming of police officers.
A controversial House bill that made it a crime for bystanders to record police while performing law enforcement activities was signed into law by Gov. Doug Ducey on July 6.
The Alliance joined a letter by the National Press Photographers Association asking Ducey to veto the bill in July.
The letter explained that the bill runs counter to the established right to photograph and record police officers performing their official duties in a public place.
Federal Judge John J. Tuchi issued a preliminary injunction on Sept. 9 to temporarily block the enforcement of a new state law that would restrict how citizens interact with police. Judge Tuchi then gave legislators a week to decide whether or not they wanted to defend the law, which would make it a misdemeanor to record police.
The law would have made it illegal to film police officers during law enforcement activity eight feet or closer or if the officer has given the person warnings to stop recording.
If the law enforcement activity is being performed on private property from an adjacent room then a person may record the officers less than eight feet away.
Law enforcement activity includes police questioning a suspicious person, conducting an arrest or handling a disorderly person who is acting unusual.
Rep. Kavanagh, a former police officer, sponsored the bill.
“The fact that I was involved in my police career making hundreds of street arrests, I know that when you’re arresting somebody or talking to a suspicious person there is a potential for violence,” he said, “You need to focus on the person or persons that you are contacting.”
Kavanagh found trouble in trying to find lawyers who would defend the police filming law. A lawsuit was filed by 10 news organizations and the American Civil Liberties Union against the state of Arizona claiming the law infringed on First Amendment rights.
The defendants included Attorney General Mark Brnovich, Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell and Maricopa County Sheriff Paul Penzone. They said they would not defend the law.
K.M. Bell, an ACLU attorney who lobbied against this bill, was pleased Judge Tuchi made the decision to block the law from being enforced.
“Standing there holding a phone is in no way interfering with the police. It is also protected by the first amendment to the United States Constitution which police officers are sworn to uphold,” they said.
Bell went on to explain that many courts have looked at this law and every court has found that there is clearly an established First Amendment right to record government officials – including police officers performing their duties.
Kavanagh claimed that this law doesn’t completely stop people from filming the police.
“Nobody can tell me that with today’s sophisticated cell phone video cameras, a person cannot get a good videotape of an encounter from eight feet away,” he said.
He said if someone’s goal is to document the whole police encounter, being any closer than eight feet wouldn’t show the full picture.
K.M. Bell and the ACLU argued that there is no need for the law whatsoever since there are already multiple laws in Arizona that police can use if there is interference while performing their duties.
“If you are blocking them from where they need to go and an officer asks you to move and you don’t then they can arrest you for failure to obey a lawful order which is a crime,” said Bell.
“In recent years, there have been numerous, tragic deaths at the hands of police that were recorded by civilian bystanders, and that footage has been critical to pushing back on unchecked police brutality,” said the ACLU.
Kavanagh plans to present an amended version of this law in January which takes into account the concerns brought up by Judge Tuchi.
Contact the reporter at jasnelgr@asu.edu
