The topic at hand is a controversial law passed by Arizona Governor Doug Ducey prohibiting civilians from recording the activities of law enforcement officers within eight feet. The law claims to prevent violence and misunderstanding, yet citizens cannot help but wonder if the true motivation behind this law is an attempt to discourage the recording of police brutality. Violent interactions between citizens and police officers have become a rampant concern in recent years, particularly in predominantly brown and black communities. While the police force advocates its necessity to safeguard and serve the citizens, there is no denying the fact that excessive force is often used to subdue individuals exercising their constitutional rights. In many circumstances where civilians were just conducting themselves within their legal rights, law enforcement caused them undue harm, even in some cases leading to fatalities. Fortunately, many of these disturbing encounters have been captured on camera by concerned citizens, providing evidence that helped hold the police accountable. The right to record the police in the performance of their duties is protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.

The controversial Arizona law has elicited an outcry from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and other groups which advocate for individual rights. Arizona's law contravenes the principle of freedom of expression, particularly in the context of citizens holding the police accountable. The police force has a long history of preventing civilian bystanders from recording their conduct. Sometimes, they even harass the civilians who attempt to record them. It is clear that this law has more to do with disallowing video recording of police activity than with preventing misunderstandings and violence. The language of the law distinguishes between "making a recording" and not using one's cell phone alongside police activity, but the fact remains that recording police activity is what is deemed illegal—not holding up phone cameras.

Moreover, the law gives too much leeway to police officers with regards to defining what constitutes interference with their "law enforcement activity." This suggests that police officers have the power to arrest civilians exercising their right to record the police in their official duties. This broad interpretation of police activity can turn any everyday police action into a possible criminal offense for anyone who records law enforcement activity. The exceptions that the law grants for recording within a "private and indoor place, a vehicle, or when you are the subject of the police interaction” may not hold up in matters of personal interpretation by the officer on the scene. This law directly clashes with the freedom of speech and protest promised by the First Amendment and, at its core, seeks to stop citizens from holding law enforcement officials accountable. It is high time for the state of Arizona to repeal this unconstitutional law before it causes irreparable harm.

Approximately 77% of Americans carry smartphones equipped with cameras, which means that they possess an important tool for holding law enforcement accountable. In fact, citizens have used their mobile devices to record police officers committing crimes and violence, leading to national conversations about the need for law enforcement reform. Recently, on July 10, 2017, a federal court ruled that recording police officers performing their duties in public is protected under the First Amendment's freedom of speech clause. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals became the sixth federal appellate court to acknowledge the importance of ordinary people with recording devices in holding police accountable, securing their constitutional protection to do so. Police officers who retaliate against civilians recording them violate their First Amendment rights, which no federal court of appeals has disputed.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has filed multiple lawsuits against various municipalities, including the City of Philadelphia, on behalf of plaintiffs arrested, detained or cited in retaliation for recording police. While the Supremacy Clause dictates that the federal government holds greater power than state governments, the 10th Amendment reserves certain powers for the states or people. In Arizona, state laws intended to distract and dissuade citizens from government officials' agendas led to an unconstitutional law. Governor Ducey's leniency towards corrupted law enforcement, seen as an effort to prevent lawsuits against the state's law enforcement, violates citizens' First Amendment rights, prompting the ACLU to take legal action.

Smartphones have become one of the most critical tools to document instances of police brutality and illegal search and seizure, especially with the rise of on-the-spot recordings. The daytime lynching of George Floyd stands out as one of the most notable reasons why citizens must exercise their civil duty and right to record police officers. Four officers publicly kneed on Floyd's neck, causing his death, which led to a nationwide movement of protests after citizens recorded the incident. Arizona's unconstitutional law violates the First Amendment, and it's crucial to hold law enforcement accountable.

Lisa Deaderick's July 2022 article in the San Diego Union Tribune reports on a federal court's decision to uphold citizens' right to film police, as protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. This decision serves as a reaffirmation of the importance of free speech in documenting interactions with law enforcement.

On the topic of states defying federal laws, Rachel Martin examines the repercussions in her March 2018 segment for NPR. When states choose to ignore or contradict federal legislation, it can cause confusion and conflict. However, there are also cases where states have been able to push for change and progress by taking a stand against unjust policies.

Molly Tack-Hopper discusses a recent court case in an ACLU article from August 2022. The judge involved in the case had previously ruled against citizens' right to record police, but this decision was ultimately overturned. This victory highlights the importance of challenging unjust policies and fighting for civil liberties.

Finally, in an August 2022 article for the ACLU, Shreya Tewari examines Arizona's new law banning citizens from recording police. Tewari argues that this law is a clear violation of the First Amendment and is sure to result in negative consequences. This serves as a reminder of the ongoing need to protect and uphold our fundamental rights to free speech and documentation.