West Hampton Lee Zeldin / Tim Bishop Debate. I have to say, last night at the debate the League of Women Voters of the Hamptons violated NY State Open Meeting Law as well as my civil liberties to record a public event. Under Article 7 of NY State Open Meeting Law you have the right to video, record, or take notes at a public event. (The Open Meetings Law applies to public bodies. That term is defined to include entities consisting of two or more people that conduct public business and perform a governmental function for New York State, for an agency of the state, or for public corporations, such as cities, counties, towns, villages and school districts. Committees and subcommittees of these entities are also included within the definition.) However, First Amendment considerations arise when you are openly recording the activities of police officers (or other public officials) carrying out their duties in public places. A number of U.S. Courts of Appeals have held that, in such circumstances, the First Amendment protects the right to record audio and video regardless of whether the police/officials consent. This constitutional right would override any state or federal laws that would otherwise prohibit such recording. Currently, the following U.S. Courts of Appeals have recognized the First Amendment right to record the police and/or other public officials: •First Circuit (with jurisdiction over Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Puerto Rico, and Rhode Island): see Glik v. Cunniffe, 655 F.3d 78, 85 (1st Cir. 2011) ([A] citizens right to film government officials, including law enforcement officers, in the discharge of their duties in a public space is a basic, vital, and well-established liberty safeguarded by the First Amendment.); Iacobucci v. Boulter, 193 F.3d 14 (1st Cir. 1999) (police lacked authority to prohibit citizen from recording commissioners in town hall because [the citizens] activities were peaceful, not performed in derogation of any law, and done in the exercise of his First Amendment rights[.]). •Seventh Circuit (with jurisdiction over Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin): see ACLU v. Alvarez, 679 F.3d 583, 595 (7th Cir. 2012) (The act of making an audio or audiovisual recording is necessarily included within the First Amendments guarantee of speech and press rights as a corollary of the right to disseminate the resulting recording.). •Ninth Circuit (with jurisdiction over Alaska, Arizona, California, Guam, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, the Northern Mariana Islands, Oregon, and Washington): see Fordyce v. City of Seattle, 55 F.3d 436, 438 (9th Cir. 1995) (assuming a First Amendment right to record the police); see also Adkins v. Limtiaco, _ Fed. Appx _, No. 11-17543, 2013 WL 4046720 (9th Cir. Aug. 12, 2013) (recognizing First Amendment right to photograph police, citing Fordyce). •Eleventh Circuit (with jurisdiction over Alabama, Florida and Georgia): see Smith v. City of Cumming, 212 F.3d 1332, 1333 (11th Cir. 2000) (The First Amendment protects the right to gather information about what public officials do on public property, and specifically, a right to record matters of public interest.). The Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey likewise recognized the existence of such a right in Ramos v. Flowers, Docket No. A-4910-10T3 (N.J. App. Div. Sept. 21, 2012), relying heavily on the First Circuits reasoning in the Glik case. For now on I will carry the law around with me so when Im harassed or told a lie I will have the power of the law in my hand. Truthfully they are lucky that I dont file a complaint especially when I have so many witnesses.
Posted on: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 22:16:28 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015