A Boston lawyer named Simon Glik was arrested for using his cell phone to record a drug arrest on the Common. The law the attorney was arrested under bans any audio recordings not consented to by all involved parties. There are similar laws in many other states, but many protest the constitutionality as well as the fairness of such laws.
The First Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the officers' claim of "qualified immunity" due to performing their job is not valid under the First Amendment. Glik claimed that his arrest and the seizure of his cell phone violated his First and Fourth Amendment rights. The opinion explained that the police carrying out their duties is without a doubt allowed to be recorded by members of the public.
It is interesting to see this step towards allowing recording rather than away from the same. It has been a point of contention between the development of technology and the evolution of the law for some time, particularly in group settings such as classes or administrative meetings. Going forward, it will be interesting to see if further recordings are permitted. Unfortunately, it may take a number of years for the case law to truly evolve.
No comments:
Post a Comment