Arizona makes it illegal for bystanders to record cops at close range

The same week that a federal judge sentenced ex-cop Derek Chauvin to more prison time for killing George Floyd, Arizona passed a law that made it harder to record police. A recording of Chauvin's attack on Floyd went viral, which led to his conviction. The teenager was a few feet away from the camera.

A new law in Arizona requires anyone recording police activity to stand at least 8 feet away from the action. If bystanders move closer after police warn them to back off, they will be charged with a misdemeanour and face fines of up to $500, jail time of up to 30 days, or a year of community service.

It's against the law to record police at close range. The buffer should be left for police to protect them from being attacked by bystanders. He said that it was pointless to come closer and predicted that tragic outcomes would befall those who did.

Close-range recording is now illegal in Arizona with only a few exceptions. The person involved in the police activity can record if they don't interfere with the police actions. Anyone recording in a vehicle that is involved in a police stop is allowed to do so.

If law enforcement determines that the person is interfering or it is not safe for them to be in the area, they have the right to record the activity from 8 feet away. Police have a lot of power over who can record and when.

After some Tucson officers complained that bystanders stood a foot or two behind them while recording their arrests, he decided to push for a change in Arizona law. The minimum distance for entering and exiting abortion clinics was set by the US Supreme Court at 8 feet, according to the state representative.

The argument that filming from 8 feet away doesn't allow for a proper view of the scene is ridiculous according to the critic. There are recordings of police brutality from further distances, including Freddie Gray and Rodney King.

Concerns over constitutionality

Over the last 10 years, attempts to limit the recording of police activity have been struck down as unconstitutional.

A top US appeals court stopped police from arresting bystanders for recording police activity because it was a violation of both free speech and guaranteed protections against unreasonable search and seizure. There is a right to videotape police.

The US Department of Justice stated in a letter that recording police activity should only be subject to narrowly defined restrictions because it improves public confidence in law enforcement, helps ensure public safety, and holds police accountable. The First Amendment protects against abuses of power and exonerates wrongly accused cops, according to a federal appeals court.

Attorneys for the state House of Representatives told him that it might be unconstitutional to apply the 8-foot buffer to all police encounters. The bill was amended so that it only applies to filming during police-citizen encounters where there is a potential for violence, such as arresting or summonsing people.

The new law will survive inquiries into its constitutionality. The bill is a terrible idea, but it's also unconstitutional because it places unnecessary burdens on people and grants police too much discretion, according to the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona.

K.M. Bell, staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona, said that the law is in violation of the First Amendment.

Bell said in an email that the law will make it harder to hold police officers accountable for their actions.

Now that the bill has passed, Kavanagh did not respond to a request for comment.

If you want to capture close-up footage that holds police accountable, you'll need to rely on your camera's zoom capabilities. One of the most important civil rights documents in a generation is her close-range video.