Arizona Attorney General Says It Won’t Enforce State’s Dumbass ‘No Recording Cops Within 8 Feet’ Law

Free Speech

from the sayonara,-shitheels dept

Because cops are the frailest of creatures and are actively harmed by people, you know, looking at them, legislators have made sure they’re ultra-protected by enacting super shitty laws that elevate cops above the people they serve.

“Blue Lives” laws insist cops’ lives are worth more than anyone else’s lives. They add years to sentences if the crime victim is a cop. Cops who claim to have been “assaulted” by someone whose rights they’ve violated can often avail themselves of “victims’ rights” laws to keep their names from being made public. Another subset of laws increases legal penalties for interfering with/assaulting “first responders,” even though it’s only cops that experience this sort of repercussive friction when doing their jobs.

(Has anyone ever been booked for assaulting a fireman/EMT? Yeah, I thought not. It’s only cops crying “assault” because someone failed to cuff themselves, retire to the back of a cruiser, and throw the book at themselves while booking themselves in at the local jail.)

Elected idiots seem to believe people with an obscene amount of discretionary power should be even more protected from the people they serve. That’s how asinine legislation becomes awful reality, even when those passing the laws should know better than to fuck with the First Amendment.

In July of 2022, then Arizona Governor Doug Doucey decided his state’s most idiotic legislators were right: cops deserve to be protected from people that actively observe their public activities. He signed into law a bill that prevented recording cops from any distance under 8 feet. How this would be enforced was left to the imaginations of cops who don’t like being filmed, despite plenty of court precedent guaranteeing this First Amendment right.

So, of course, the new law was immediately challenged in court. Within two months of its passage, a federal court had issued an injunction against the obviously unconstitutional statute — one even Arizona cops felt wasn’t worth defending.

Securing an injunction is always helpful. Forcing the law off the books, however, remains the best solution. And that appears to be where this law is headed, now that the state attorney general has decided it won’t waste its resources defending an obviously unconstitutional law.

The Arizona Attorney General agreed to settle a federal lawsuit against the state, declaring that a state statute that bans video recording within eight feet of law enforcement activity is unconstitutional.

[…]

In September, then-Attorney General Mark Brnovich refused to argue against the plaintiffs, entering a “non-opposition” notice in court, stating in part: “The Attorney General is not the proper party to defend the merits of (the statute) A.R.S. § 13-3732.”

On Wednesday, a representative for the current Arizona Attorney General, Kris Mayes, agreed to an injunction that finds the law violates the First Amendment and cannot be enforced.

That’s the substance of the state’s settlement [PDF] with those opposing the law. The settlement specifically agrees the statute violates the First Amendment and cannot survive constitutional scrutiny because it engages in content-based restriction (the recording of cops) and “chills a substantial amount of First Amendment protected activity.”

It’s always refreshing to see this sort of thing from state politicians and prosecutors. Other state AGs would have spent an untold amount of money defending an obviously unconstitutional law. But in Arizona — where’s it’s uber-fashionable to worship law enforcement — two consecutive AGs have told the state (and the former governor) they’re not going to go to bat for bad law. (Or, at least, not this one.)

Despite the AG’s affirmative veto of the law, one state rep — a former cop — still thinks citizens should be restricted when recording police officers performing their public duties.

Kavanagh, a former police officer himself, told 12News on Thursday that he does not believe current laws do enough to protect police from interference and does not believe that limits on distance would stop the public from holding police accountable.

“The people who oppose this law made it very clear that people standing one foot behind the officer is not interfering. The current obstruction law isn’t enough,” Kavanagh said. “I am not preventing videotaping. I’m just saying keep back so you don’t distract the officer.”

I don’t think the people “opposing” this law have “made it clear” that people should be allowed to climb into an officer’s hip pocket in order to record incidents and arrests. The only people in cops’ pockets are strawmen Rep. Kavanagh hopes will burn with enough brightness it will obscure his latent desire to protect cops from public accountability.

Kavanagh’s bullshit — one supported by none other than the former governor himself — is still going to cost Arizona taxpayers some money. Even with the AG bowing out early rather than wasting funds defending the indefensible, the AG’s office has agreed to pay $69,000 in legal fees to the prevailing parties. It may not seem like much but it does matter… at least to those still interested in protecting the rights of Arizonans — a group that does not include the former governor, Rep. Kavanagh, or his allies in the legislature.

Filed Under: 1st amendment, arizona, blue lives matter, kris mayes, mark brnovich, recording police