Obama administration says Constitution protects cell phone recordings

Obama administration says Constitution protects cell phone recordings

This is a discussion on Obama administration says Constitution protects cell phone recordings within the Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Here is a link to an article I came across this morning. I realize that we've discussed this topic several times in the past, but ...

Results 1 to 5 of 5
Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By varob

Thread: Obama administration says Constitution protects cell phone recordings

  1. #1
    Distinguished Member Array noway2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,952

    Obama administration says Constitution protects cell phone recordings

    Here is a link to an article I came across this morning. I realize that we've discussed this topic several times in the past, but this is the first time the president has weighed in on the matter.
    From the article:
    The decision to come down on Sharp's side of the argument is particularly significant because the executive branch is ordinarily quick to defend the prerogatives of law enforcement. Although this specific incident involved city police officers, the same reasoning would presumably protect the right of citizens to record and disseminate videos on the conduct of officials in the FBI, DEA, and other federal law enforcement agencies.

    The filing is the latest sign of an emerging consensus that the First Amendment protects the right to record the public conduct of government officials with a cell phone.
    Also of interests is that elsewhere in the article, is that while the courts are claiming that people have the right to record police they seem also indicate it isn't the 1st amendment that is the basis for this right, though they don't say what it is.


  2. #2
    VIP Member Array varob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    4,469
    Video keeps all parties involved honest.
    jumpwing likes this.
    Don't believe what you hear and only half of what you see!
    -Tony Soprano

  3. #3
    Distinguished Member Array Black Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Posts
    1,345
    They were probably thinking of the "expectation of privacy". If you are in the public view or in ear shot you have no expectation of privacy. It seems to me that this is what they were thinking.

  4. #4
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    Quote Originally Posted by noway2 View Post
    :SNIP:Also of interests is that elsewhere in the article, is that while the courts are claiming that people have the right to record police they seem also indicate it isn't the 1st amendment that is the basis for this right, though they don't say what it is.
    I was taught when growing up that the fact something isn't mentioned in the Constitution was proof that it was an individual right. That the founding fathers originally listed only the powers we gave up to the government.
    This is no longer an idea that is accepted or taught it seems.

    Michael

  5. #5
    VIP Member Array Doghandler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    West Branch
    Posts
    2,325
    Quote Originally Posted by noway2 View Post
    ...

    Also of interests is that elsewhere in the article, is that while the courts are claiming that people have the right to record police they seem also indicate it isn't the 1st amendment that is the basis for this right, though they don't say what it is.
    "the Obama Administration said in a Tuesday court filing. While the city's new training materials acknowledge that it's legal to record the actions of the police, they "do not explicitly acknowledge that private citizens' right to record the police derives from the First Amendment, nor do they provide clear and effective guidance to officers about the important First Amendment principle involved."

    Bad writing! Fifteen yard penalty! Loss of rights! Loss of down!
    Sorry,

    What I gather is that the Obama guys are mad at the city guys for not enumerating the 1st Amendment in their arument. Yes? No?

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

cell phones recording police actions and obama

,
homeland security phone recording law
,
homeland security phone recordings
,
obama administration recording police
,
recording government officials is constitutional
Click on a term to search for related topics.