Recording Police Officers and Public Officials - Great ammo to defeat statist shills

Thank the gang at Digital Media Law Project for this fine report, nice to print this out & keep a copy with you @ all times if you feel like exposing corruption.


Currently, the following U.S. Courts of Appeals have recognized the First Amendment right to record the police and/or other public officials:

First Circuit (with jurisdiction over Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Puerto Rico, and Rhode Island): see Glik v. Cunniffe, 655 F.3d 78, 85 (1st Cir. 2011) ("[A] citizen's right to film government officials, including law enforcement officers, in the discharge of their duties in a public space is a basic, vital, and well-established liberty safeguarded by the First Amendment."); Iacobucci v. Boulter, 193 F.3d 14 (1st Cir. 1999) (police lacked authority to prohibit citizen from recording commissioners in town hall "because [the citizen's] activities were peaceful, not performed in derogation of any law, and done in the exercise of his First Amendment rights[.]").

Seventh Circuit (with jurisdiction over Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin): see ACLU v. Alvarez, 679 F.3d 583, 595 (7th Cir. 2012) ("The act of making an audio or audiovisual recording is necessarily included within the First Amendment's guarantee of speech and press rights as a corollary of the right to disseminate the resulting recording.").

Ninth Circuit (with jurisdiction over Alaska, Arizona, California, Guam, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, the Northern Mariana Islands, Oregon, and Washington): see Fordyce v. City of Seattle, 55 F.3d 436, 438 (9th Cir. 1995) (assuming a First Amendment right to record the police); see also Adkins v. Limtiaco, _ Fed. App'x _, No. 11-17543, 2013 WL 4046720 (9th Cir. Aug. 12, 2013) (recognizing First Amendment right to photograph police, citing Fordyce).
Eleventh Circuit (with jurisdiction over Alabama, Florida and Georgia): see Smith v. City of Cumming, 212 F.3d 1332, 1333 (11th Cir. 2000) ("The First Amendment protects the right to gather information about what public officials do on public property, and specifically, a right to record matters of public interest.").

JURISDICTION Page 1

There is another discussion located at TeamLaw that discusses in great detail the fact that we no longer have a seated original jurisdiction government and how and when our federal government incorporated in 1871 to conduct business without restriction within its 10 square mile disctirct.
As has been discussed on this site in other articles, the US Consitution allows this at Article 1, Section 8 Clause 17 which gives the federal government "exclusive jurisdiction" over its territory.

It is this one clause in the US Constitution that made the Supreme Court ruling regarding the ban on guns in Washington DC a wrong decision.

It also supports the notion that the Supreme Court is an arm of a corporation and is not upholding the original Constitution. Since the original jurisdiction federal government has "exclusive jurisdiction" within its territory, then none of the rest of the Constitution applies within its territory else it would not have "exclusive jurisdiction" .https://afreecountry.com/?q=government_corporations

Who is your master? Who owns you?