Latest news with #GraysonClary
Indianapolis Star
06-08-2025
- Politics
- Indianapolis Star
Indiana law creating 25-foot 'buffer zone' around police unconstitutional by federal court
A law requiring a 25-foot buffer zone between on-duty police officers and bystanders is "unconstitutionally vague," the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ruled on Aug. 5. "The decision should throw cold water on enthusiasm for these new police bubble laws across the country," said Grayson Clary, a staff attorney at the Reporters' Committee for Freedom of the Press. The 2023 buffer zone law has been challenged for potential violations of the First Amendment, which guarantees freedom of speech and the press, and the Fourteenth Amendment, which requires due process and equal protection under the law. The Aug. 5 ruling was based solely on the latter. The court stated that the law is susceptible to discriminatory or arbitrary enforcement and would grant police discretion to make arbitrary arrests. Police could "subject any pedestrian to potential criminal liability by simply ordering them not to approach, even if the pedestrian is doing nothing more than taking a morning stroll or merely walking up to an officer to ask for directions," wrote Judge Doris Pryor, who was appointed to the Seventh Circuit court by then-President Joe Biden in 2022. Lawyers representing the state's case in favor of the statute conceded that officers could tell people to stop approaching for no reason, including a made-up reason or a "bad breakfast." That reasoning will not stand "no matter how bitter the coffee or soggy the scrambled eggs," Pryor wrote. The buffer zone law's enforcement had been on hold since September 2024 when a federal judge presiding over a lawsuit filed by a coalition of Indiana media organizations, including IndyStar, ruled that the law was too vague to be enforced fairly. Additional proceedings will take place to determine whether the law is permanently blocked for all Indiana residents or only the parties named in the lawsuit. A June 2025 U.S. Supreme Court ruling sharply limited federal courts' ability to issue injunctions that affect people other than the parties in a particular lawsuit. In practice, because the Seventh Circuit has already made clear that the law is unconstitutional on its face, it would be deeply challenging for the state to enforce it, Clary said. The law was established in April 2023 by House Bill 1186, which made it a Class C misdemeanor offense for anyone who comes within 25 feet of an on-duty officer after being asked to stop. In a separate ruling in May, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the law, as written, does not violate the First Amendment. No decision was made as to whether the law would violate freedom of the press in practice. Media coalitions' cases challenging similar police buffer laws in Louisiana and Tennessee remain pending.
Yahoo
15-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Bill expanding Tennessee law enforcement powers during protests draws pushback
Metro Nashville Police wearing riot gear during a 2020 protest in Downtown Nashville. (Photo: Alex Kent) A GOP bill giving law enforcement expanded arrest powers during public protests and police actions is drawing pushback from civil rights and journalist groups as a potential infringement on First Amendment rights. The multi-part bill (HB55/SB30) by Tennessee House Leader William Lamberth of Portland and Sen. Mark Pody of Lebanon — both Republicans — would allow police to order members of the media and public to remain 25 feet away from crime scenes, traffic stops and any 'ongoing and immediate threat to public safety.' The proposed legislation would also give police added enforcement powers during public protests and demonstrations. The bill redefines the crime of 'littering' to include the distribution of flyers with the 'intent to to unlawfully intimidate,' criminalizes the hanging of banners and signs over bridges and tunnels and allows police to make misdemeanor arrests of protestors identified through social media videos. The bill additionally gives law enforcement the right to demand a person's name based on 'reasonable suspicion of a legal violation.' In a letter to lawmakers Monday, more than two dozen groups representing Tennessee Muslim, Jewish, Black and immigrant groups, and civil liberties advocates, warned the legislation is 'likely to have a chilling effect' on a spectrum of communities seeking to make their voices heard in response to public policy decisions. 'We are living in a period in which constitutional rights and physical safety are at increased risk with federal workers, students, LGBTQ+ immigrant, Jewish, Muslim and BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color) communities caught in the crosshairs,' their letter noted. The 'real world impact' of the proposed legislation would infringe on the fundamental right of speech and assembly, the groups said. There's a million-and-a-half reasons why reporters need to be in close proximity to law enforcement to do their own job. This gives police far too much discretion to shut that reporting down. – Grayson Clary, Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press Media organizations have also opposed the legislation. 'As you can imagine, journalists appear within 25 feet of law enforcement officers doing their day job every day,' said Grayson Clary, staff attorney with Lawyers Committee for Freedom of the Press, which provides legal support to journalists. 'Maybe it's a crime scene, a protest, a police response to a rally when it takes a turn,' he said. 'There's a million-and-a-half reasons why reporters need to be in close proximity to law enforcement to do their own job. This gives police far too much discretion to shut that reporting down.' Similar legislation in Indiana and Louisiana creating buffer zones between police and the public, including the media, have been preliminarily halted by federal courts, Clary noted. Both laws are currently in the federal appeals process. Pody told lawmakers last week that the intent of a 25-foot buffer line around police is not to keep the public from observing police actions, but to protect the work of law enforcement. 'They can still be witnessed. They can still be videotaped,' Pody said. 'I think that law enforcement is not opposed to anything like that. We still want them to be held accountable…We're just saying there's a 25 foot radius if (police) are actively doing something where they need to be focused on the job.' But Sen. London Lamar, a Memphis Democrat, noted that requiring the public to be 25 feet away could keep police actions out of view. She cited the murder of George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police – an event captured on bystander video. 'The flaw in this part (of Tennessee's bill) is it doesn't give citizens the ability to exercise their First Amendment right and catch that,' she said. 'And it opens up the door to police misconduct, and it shields them from citizens having the evidence of police misconduct.' Republican Sen. Brent Taylor of Memphis cited 'bridge bandits, intersection imbeciles and interstate insurrectionists' disrupting roadways in his district for his support of the bill. In response to questions from Taylor, a Tennessee Highway Patrol attorney confirmed that, should the bill become law, protestors in Memphis who appear in social media images blocking roadways and bridges could be arrested by state troopers even if Memphis police declined to make arrests. The bill's origins lie with action taken by the Metro Nashville Council last year in response to several anti-semitic and racist demonstrations by white supremacist and neo-Nazis in downtown Nashville. The largely Democratic council voted overwhelmingly in favor of passing four ordinances aimed at hate speech and those who promote it, including buffer zones around public buildings, a ban on highway banners and a provision banning the transport of individuals in the back of a box truck — the way some white supremacist protestors arrived in Nashville last summers. Tennessee Republicans, Nashville mayor back antisemitism bill Nashville Mayor Freddie O'Connell and others in Metro government worked with Republicans to craft the current legislation and its backers have cited the need to stem a rise in anti-semitic demonstrations. 'While addressing anti-Semitism is a shared and important concern, these bills include sweeping provisions with dangerous and far-reaching consequences that compromise free speech, public safety, and the principles of equitable justice,' said Sabina Mohyuddin, executive director of the Nashville-based American Muslim Advisory Council, which opposes the bill along with Bend the Arc Jewish Action, Latino Memphis, Nashville Jews for Justice and the NAACP Nashville branch. 'In today's political climate—where immigrant and pro-Palestinian voices are increasingly targeted—this legislation raises grave concerns,' she said. The Tennessee Senate adopted the bill 30-2 Monday. In the House, the bill will be considered after debate over the state budget. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
