Supreme Court rejects Illinois plea to ban taping of police

[Miramonti]

Good news. A legal ban of taping police would have been an invitation for police to get away with violating citizens' rights. Most wouldn't take that invitation of course, but would lead to many injustices by those who would and would escape prosecution.

Supreme Court rejects Illinois plea to ban taping of police

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.

 

[monovillage]

Just somewhat good. I would rather have had them hear the case and declare that both audio and video recording of public officials on public property is completely legal.

 

[waggy]

Just somewhat good. I would rather have had them hear the case and declare that both audio and video recording of public officials on public property is completely legal.

agreed.

 

[hal2kilo]

I'll take whatever small wins for the 4th Ammendment we can get. The struggle for personal freedom continues.

 

[monovillage]

I'll take whatever small wins for the 4th Ammendment we can get. The struggle for personal freedom continues.

Agreed.

 

[CrackRabbit]

Something that everyone in P&N should agree on.

 

[Pens1566]

Just somewhat good. I would rather have had them hear the case and declare that both audio and video recording of public officials on public property is completely legal.

There isn't much more that would accomplish than letting the appeals court ruling stand.

 

[monovillage]

There isn't much more that would accomplish than letting the appeals court ruling stand.

It specified only audio.

 

[Darwin333]

Just somewhat good. I would rather have had them hear the case and declare that both audio and video recording of public officials on public property is completely legal.

What I want to know is how are the police not violating the exact same law with their dashcams?

Well, that and how the fuck did they find enough dumbasses in their government to pass a dumbfuck law like that in the first place.

 

[chucky2]

What I want to know is how are the police not violating the exact same law with their dashcams?

Well, that and how the fuck did they find enough dumbasses in their government to pass a dumbfuck law like that in the first place.

Dude, this is IL. How can you even ask that?

 

[shortylickens]

Just somewhat good. I would rather have had them hear the case and declare that both audio and video recording of public officials on public property is completely legal.

This.

For the most part I think cops are legitimate servants. But they are also public employees and should not feel the need to do their day to day, public jobs in secrecy. Undercover work is one thing, uniformed men and women dealing with citizens on the streets is something else. I can not think of one legit reason they would need privacy protection while doing their jobs.

 

[Miramonti]

Just somewhat good. I would rather have had them hear the case and declare that both audio and video recording of public officials on public property is completely legal.

Sure that would be better, but this decision to pass on the case and let the court of appeals stand is enough intimidation to prevent most other politicians from wasting taxpayer money to lobby for and pass such a retarded law.

So sure, legally this is not as strong as actually taking the case and making such a ruling, but the affect will for the most part probably be the same. Atleast until someone thinks they found a potential way around it.

 

[FallenHero]

What I want to know is how are the police not violating the exact same law with their dashcams?

Well, that and how the fuck did they find enough dumbasses in their government to pass a dumbfuck law like that in the first place.

The law is so draconian that they actually wrote an exemption into the law to allow the police to record their own traffic stops.

Personally, I'm hoping the law gets completely tossed out. There is no need to have it written and enforced the way it is.

<---Cop in IL.

 

[EagleKeeper]

This.

For the most part I think cops are legitimate servants. But they are also public employees and should not feel the need to do their day to day, public jobs in secrecy. Undercover work is one thing, uniformed men and women dealing with citizens on the streets is something else. I can not think of one legit reason they would need privacy protection while doing their jobs.

Only reason (not a good one) is that such "recordings" may not show the full story; but are created during the fact and will usually put the LEO in a bad light.

Consequently; it could impact the decision of an LEO because of being placed in a compromising situation.

 

[Paul98]

So is it is illegal to catch a cop doing something illegal in camera?

 

[Ausm]

Good news. A legal ban of taping police would have been an invitation for police to get away with violating citizens' rights. Most wouldn't take that invitation of course, but would lead to many injustices by those who would and would escape prosecution.

Supreme Court rejects Illinois plea to ban taping of police

I think this is GREAT news.

 

[shortylickens]

Only reason (not a good one) is that such "recordings" may not show the full story; but are created during the fact and will usually put the LEO in a bad light.

Consequently; it could impact the decision of an LEO because of being placed in a compromising situation.

It seems to me in those circumstances a judge should ban them as evidence during a trial. But I dont see that its unacceptable to simply make the vids.

 

[piasabird]

What are the police trying to hide?

 

[Juror No. 8]

What are the police trying to hide?

Perhaps the fact that they constitute America's biggest street gang?

 

[airdata]

I'm way too lazy.

Somebody dig up the old #OWS thread and cross check people's comments here and there. Pretty sure there's numerous people who like to flip flop on issues dependent on the situation and whether or not they can try to negatively attribute something to Obama.