re: New Louisiana law will criminalize approaching police under certain circumstances

quote:

---

but the fact that I can film LEO within 25 feet today shows that there are more restrictions on me once this law is implemented

---

But you can’t, if the officer has already asked you to move away to a point further than that, assuming his order was lawful under the circumstances.

Which, as I read the law, is what it’s doing. Defining a fixed distance you have to back up to once ordered to do so.

quote:

---

Then why did you say above that it expanded a restriction that already exists?

---

Because that's exactly what it does.

I can film LEO within 25' today while complying with the existing law.

Once this law passes, I will not be able to do so.

That is an expansion of government, restricting my 1A rights.

quote:

---

If you're just standing there, filming without any aggression, they cannot.

---

They can absolutely tell you to go back to a fixed point, say a separate portion of a parking lot or something, etc. That object or imaginary line may be more than 25 feet away, and it may not. 25 feet is not that far of a distance.

Like I said earlier, there’s a difference between a known violent felon in a bar parking lot “filming” and a nine year old girl standing there with a phone.

quote:

---

That is an expansion of government, restricting my 1A rights.

---

They're not restricted at 24 feet but they are at 25?

I'll ask again: what should the distance be?

quote:

---

If the officer believes that you backed up enough, sure.

---

I don't know that 25 feet is the perfect answer, but I can see a big upside to taking discretion away from LE. If the law is 15 feet and you get back 15 feet he can't jack you up just because you pissed him off.

5th Circuit Case originally from LA

quote:

---

The situation here is fundamentally different. While D.J. was clearly close to the arrest scene— the perimeter of which was being secured by Moring—D.J. was not a hazard, was not too close, and did not impede the Deputies’ ability to perform their duties. Indeed, the Deputies successfully handcuffed Perkins despite D.J.’s presence and active recording.

---

quote:

---

As we explained in Turner, “[f]ilming the police contributes to the public’s ability to hold the police accountable, ensure that police officers are not abusing their power, and make informed decisions about police policy.” 848 F.3d at 689. Such was the case here. D.J., therefore, did not cross the “line between filming the police . . . and hindering the police,” Buehler, 27 F.4th at 976, and was engaged in a clearly established, constitutionally protected activity on his family’s private property.

---

They only have the ability to legally stop you from hindering their official duties. And that's the most conservative appeals court stating that.

quote:

---

I don't know that 25 feet is the perfect answer, but I can see a big upside to taking discretion away from LE. If the law is 15 feet and you get back 15 feet he can't jack you up just because you pissed him off.

---

The problem to reducing it to a set distance is there is no tape measures available to determine the actual distance involved.

quote:

---

I already said. The distance permitting physical interference.

---

Have you decided if this is an expansion of an existing restriction or a new restriction yet? You've claimed both.

quote:

---

Now assess the problems created by making every single instance discretionary.

---

Unfortunately law enforcement related issues have to live in that universe because every situation is different. Rigid standards on that type of thing don’t work in real life.

quote:

---

I'd rather have a clear delineation between what will and won't get me arrested vs relying on how bad a day the cop is having.

---

My personal preference is to stay the hell away entirely