FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
Posted on 11/26/2012 9:20:25 PM PST by Altariel
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear an appeal of a controversial Illinois law prohibiting people from recording police officers on the job.
By passing on the issue, the justices left in place a federal appeals court ruling that found that the state's anti-eavesdropping law violates free-speech rights when used against people who audiotape police officers.
A temporary injunction issued after that June ruling effectively bars Cook County State's Attorney Anita Alvarez from prosecuting anyone under the current statute. On Monday, the American Civil Liberties Union, which brought the lawsuit against Alvarez, asked a federal judge hearing the case to make the injunction permanent, said Harvey Grossman, legal director of the ACLU of Illinois.
(Excerpt) Read more at chicagotribune.com ...
the public should be able to tape government officials in the course of their duties. our cars can’t be covered under 4a rights and overhead police drones can loiter over our property indefinitely, and the cops can’t be taped doing their job in public? it’s the right decision.
[Meanwhile, several efforts to amend the statute in Springfield have stalled in committee amid heavy lobbying from law enforcement groups in favor of the current law.]
TRANSLATION: The police unions are greasing the palms of legislators to keep the law intact. But they failed to get to the judges.
Citizens with video recorders could really put a crimp in various law enforcement rackets in Chicago.
The Supreme Court finally does something right.
I tried diagraming that sentence, and I got a hand cramp and ran out of paper.
/johnny
Actually, if the police, and more precisely the police unions, really cared about protecting their officers, they would want police activity recorded to protect the officer from lawsuits. The fact that governments try and block recording of police operations shows they indeed have something to hide.
Good call by the supremes.
LEOs afraid of having their public duties recorded should scare any clear thinking individual.
The very idea is just ridiculous.
The 1st Amendment lives to fight another day.
Great decision, though I wish they’d actually heard it, to make a stronger statement how blatantly unconstitutional it is. Several other states have these types of anti-freedom laws.
“Actually, if the police, and more precisely the police unions, really cared about protecting their officers, they would want police activity recorded to protect the officer from lawsuits. The fact that governments try and block recording of police operations shows they indeed have something to hide.”
Indeed.
FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
Absolutely.
Thanks, Tex.
And what all the people whoe were victims of Felony Kidnapping at the hands of the Police?? Are they now being prosecuted for this BLATANT FELONY KIDNAPPING of countless US Citizens?? and why not?? They all belong in PRISON. And the US Supreme Court just AFFIRMED that. Where are the Federal Prosecutions?? Wake up America.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.