MENU
SEARCHThe law states that people cannot record the law enforcement activity if they know or reasonably should know that the activity is occurring. They are also are prohibited from recording if an officer has warned them about capturing the incident within 8 feet.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Arizona filed a lawsuit on Tuesday against a law in the state that bans members of the public from recording police within 8 feet of a “law enforcement activity.”
The lawsuit states that the law, which Gov. Doug Ducey (R) signed last month , violates the First Amendment, suppressing the right to free speech and limiting accountability and protests of government actions.
The law states that people cannot record the law enforcement activity if they know or reasonably should know that the activity is occurring. They are also are prohibited from recording if an officer has warned them about capturing the incident within 8 feet.
The law defines a law enforcement activity as questioning a “suspicious” person, conducting an arrest, issuing a summons, enforcing the law or handling an “emotionally disturbed or disorderly person” exhibiting “abnormal” behavior.
A release from the ACLU states that recording police encounters and other law enforcement activity in public is one of the few ways that members of a community and journalists can hold police accountable for misconduct, the Hill reports.
Arizona state Rep. John Kavanagh (R), who sponsored the legislation, said in a March op-ed that having the law as a “buffer” is necessary, as police may not know if someone approaching is an innocent bystander or an accomplice to someone they are arresting.
Discover how one police department cut crime nearly in half using smarter patrol data. This whitepaper breaks down the real-world strategy behind a 46% drop in vehicle thefts, improved officer safety, and stronger community visibility.
Read More →
Can an individual be prosecuted for despicable criminal conduct based on evidence obtained in violation of the United States Constitution? Ultimately, the Ninth Circuit judges wrote, “In the circumstances of this case (United States v. Holcomb, 23-469 (9th Cir. 2025)), respect for the Constitution and the rule of law requires an answer of “no.”
Read More →
<strong>“</strong>Cashless bail policies allow dangerous individuals to immediately return to the streets and further endanger law-abiding, hard-working Americans because they know our laws will not be enforced,” the administration said.
Read More →The DOJ said in a press release that the “sanctuary city” policies of the City of Los Angeles are illegal under federal law.
Read More →
Officers can be criminally prosecuted for using force when their actions led to escalation during contact with subjects.
Read More →
In the Tenth Circuit case of Cuervo v. Sorenson, the Court ruled officers cannot deviate from the language of the warrant.
Read More →The Civil Rights Division will be taking all necessary steps to dismiss the Louisville and Minneapolis lawsuits with prejudice, to close the underlying investigations into the Louisville and Minneapolis police departments.
Read More →House Bill 4404 would create a presumption of civil immunity for individuals who are cleared criminally after using force in self-defense, shifting the burden of proof onto plaintiffs.
Read More →Seattle police Capt. Eric Greening sued former Chief Adrian Diaz last year alleging that Diaz retaliated when Greening brought up concerns about racial and gender discrimination.
Read More →Jim Leighty, a local activist, filed two federal lawsuits last year claiming both agencies deleted or hid critical comments he had written below multiple posts, while keeping comments that were pro-police in nature.
Read More →