First Amendment auditors often test the boundaries of free speech and public access to government activities. The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees freedoms concerning religion, expression, assembly, and the right to petition. Specifically, it protects the right to film public officials in public spaces, a principle upheld in several landmark cases such as Glik v. Cunniffe (2011) and Smith v. City of Cumming (2000). These rulings affirm that citizens have the right to record public officials, including police officers, as long as they do not interfere with official duties.
In this incident, the auditor asserted his rights to film within what he perceived as a public area. He challenged the clarity and legality of the signage, arguing that the lack of explicit "authorized personnel only" signs meant he was within his rights to be there. This stance is rooted in the principle that public spaces are generally accessible for such activities unless clearly marked otherwise.
From the officers' perspective, the parking lot represented a secured area, crucial for maintaining safety and protecting sensitive operations. Law enforcement agencies often designate certain areas as restricted to prevent unauthorized access, which can pose security risks. The officers' demand for identification and their insistence on the auditor moving to a more public space were actions taken to enforce what they deemed necessary security protocols.
The Fourth Amendment provides the right against unreasonable searches and seizures, relevant here regarding the request for ID without probable cause. In Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada (2004), the Supreme Court ruled that a person can be required to identify themselves if there is reasonable suspicion of a crime. However, in this context, the auditor was not suspected of a crime but was instead engaged in a constitutionally protected activity.
The application of statutory laws concerning trespassing and restricted access depends significantly on the clarity of the signage and the specific ordinances governing public and restricted spaces. The auditor's argument hinges on the ambiguity of the signage, a critical point since clear and explicit signs are required to delineate restricted areas legally. The case of Brown v. Texas (1979) highlights that a person cannot be stopped and required to identify themselves without specific, articulable facts suggesting involvement in criminal activity.
In Adams v. City of New York (2013), the court reaffirmed that areas accessible to the public in general cannot be arbitrarily restricted without clear notification. If the signs in the parking lot merely indicated "police vehicle parking," without explicitly stating "restricted area" or "authorized personnel only," the auditor's presence might not constitute a violation.
THIS VIDEO IS FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ..
This video was created to educate citizens about constitutionally protected activities, law, and civilian rights, and emphasize the importance of constitutional awareness.
FAIR USE NOTICE.. this video may contain copyright material, the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available for the purposes of criticism, comment, reviews and news reporting which constitute the fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. Notwithstanding the provisions of sections and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work for purposes such as criticism, comment, review and news reporting is not an infringement of copyright.
Disclaimer: NONE of our videos should be considered a "call to action." We are not attorneys. Our videos should not be construed as legal advice. You should seek legal counsel if you believe that you are a victim of police misconduct. The facts presented in our videos are not indicative of our personal opinions. Laws, case law, ordinances, policies, legal doctrine, and all other jurisprudence is subject to the interpretation of the court. The videos shown are designed to be educational, and informative based on the information available at the time the video was published. All claims made are alleged.
Original video: / @rowdypodcast
First Amendment audit 1st Amendment audit cops get owned id refusal dui checkpoint refusal auditing britain Amagansett press
#idrefusal #CopGetsOwned #dismissed #firstamendmentaudit #4thAmendment #CopWatch #Trespassing #Dismissed #copdismissed #RookieCop #1aAudit #Cop #Police #CopsOwned #1stamendmentaudit #Trespassing #rookiecops #4thamendment #5thamendment #walkofshame #1aAudits #copwatch #CopsGetOwned #CopsGettingOwned #lawenforcement
Информация по комментариям в разработке