You have the right to remain silent. You have the right to an attorney. And in Illinois, you have the right to record police officers.
That wasn’t always the case. In March, the Illinois Supreme Court
struck down one of the nation’s harshest eavesdropping laws — a statute
responsible for the arrest and prosecution of ordinary citizens just
trying to hold law enforcement and public officials accountable. The
Supreme Court rightly called the law overbroad and a violation of the
First Amendment.
As a result,
Illinois became the Wild West of eavesdropping, with no prohibitions in
place. That’s great if you’re interested in recording a political rally
or an altercation between a cop and a suspect. But it’s terrible if
someone secretly records your phone conversation and ruins your
reputation by posting it online.
Since the court
decision, Representative Elaine Nekritz and I have been working on a
new law that draws a line between these two types of situations, making
sure the former is legal and the latter is not. There’s nothing new
about this distinction; for decades, the U.S. Supreme Court and federal
law have recognized that in some cases (a phone call, a chat with a
friend in your living room), people have a reasonable expectation of
privacy, and in some cases (a loud argument on the sidewalk), they
don’t.
Recently, a
federal appeals court clarified in ACLU v. Alvarez that law enforcement
officers cannot reasonably expect that their interactions with members
of the public — conducted in the course of their public duties — will be
considered private. The language in our legislation was carefully
chosen to be consistent with this opinion so as to prohibit recording or
eavesdropping on police officers only when they do have a reasonable
expectation of privacy. That exception is necessary because bugging a
squad car or listening in on a phone conversation at police headquarters
could compromise an investigation or put people at risk — for example,
if an officer were talking on the phone with a complaining witness
wishing to remain anonymous.
After
legislators publicly debated our proposal in the spring, we listened to
critics and made changes; a tweaked version passed this month and will
become law if signed by the governor.
We can improve
accountability even further by laying the legal framework for officers
to record themselves using body cameras. Several communities where
officers wear cameras have seen significant reductions in the use of
force and the number of complaints against police, and many towns and
cities in Illinois are interested in using this technology to improve
the relationship between law enforcement and the public at a time when
this is sorely needed. Rep. Nekritz and I are crafting legislation that
will allow them to take this step.
Throughout my
career, I’ve pushed for robust oversight of law enforcement. I sponsored
the legislation that created the Illinois Torture Inquiry and Relief
Commission to bring to light the truth about torture perpetrated under
ex-Chicago Chief of Police Jon Burge. Whenever citizens expose police
misconduct or excessive force, our society gets a little closer to
living up to its ideals.
That’s why it’s
so important to me to explain that the legislation I sponsored greatly
expands the public’s right to record police officers as they go about
their duties. Those who claim the proposal bans such recordings are
simply wrong.
By all means, exercise your right to record. Keep the cameras rolling. Our democracy depends on it.
