Editorial: A court victory for accountability, democratic oversight

Las Vegas Review-Journal, Las Vegas Review-Journal on Aug 28, 2026

Published in Op Eds

By clicking submit, I authorize Arcamax and its affiliates to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Privacy Policy , (2) add to information that I provide with other information like interests inferred from web page views, or data lawfully obtained from data brokers, such as past purchase or location data, or publicly available data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email or other means with offers for different types of goods and services, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

Law enforcement agencies, including in Las Vegas, have increasingly employed surveillance devices to record the activities of unsuspecting drivers (see: Flock cameras), raising obvious constitutional and privacy concerns. Ironic then, that many police departments become agitated when onlookers record the actions of officers.

Last week, a federal appeals court ruled in favor of a Connecticut man who was arrested for filming a police station from a public sidewalk. Keith Massimino was detained in October 2018, reason.com reports, after officers approached him “while he was filming their police station and told him it was illegal to do so.” He was taken into custody for obstruction after he gave vague answers to questions about his intentions and refused to produce ID.

Prosecutors later dismissed the charges, but Massimino filed suit in 2021, arguing that his rights were violated under the First and Fourth amendments. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed in part, holding the police had indeed trampled the defendant’s free speech rights. “We begin by joining a growing chorus of our sister circuits that have recognized a First Amendment right to record law enforcement activity in public,” Judge Myrna Pérez wrote, adding, “When the government wants to preserve its privacy, it may build a fence or close a door — but not ban speech.”

Reason reports that this marks the ninth federal appeals court to agree that citizens have a constitutional right to film police activity as long as they do not interfere with or obstruct an officer. The issue has yet to reach the U.S. Supreme Court, suggesting the justices are content to let these precedents stand.

“This is big,” Dan Barrett of the ACLU-CT, said in a press release. “It puts it in writing that the First Amendment protects our right to record the police in public. This decision is the difference between Connecticut residents being able to hold law enforcement accountable and the police deciding who gets to watch them work. It’s a win for democratic oversight.”

It’s not anti-police to recognize that the Bill of Rights protects Americans who record the public actions of those they depend on to protect and serve. Quite the opposite. Transparency and accountability enhance public confidence and form the foundation for a healthy criminal justice system in a free society. Mistrust and conspiracy theories flourish in the darkness.

Yet vigilance remains vital. “Despite this broad consensus in the judiciary,” C.J. Ciaramella of reason.com observes, “local police officers have continued to arrest and retaliate against videographers, and the Department of Homeland Security has declared ‘surveillance’ of law enforcement to be unlawful, extremist activity.” The next step is to ensure that officers and agencies that flout the First Amendment are held financially responsible for their actions.