The ruling will make it harder to hold police liable for retaliatory arrests.
Under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, it is against the law for the government to retaliate against citizens because they dislike the content of our speech. Federal law also gives individuals the ability to file a claim against states for violating their right to free speech. However, a recent Supreme Court ruling pushes back those rights by allowing police officers to arrest people for filming them — without threat of a lawsuit.
The case, Nieves v. Bartlett, has troubling implications for individuals across the United States — particularly those exercising their free speech rights, or anyone in a community that may be targeted by law enforcement. The Supreme Court held that individuals cannot sue police officers for retaliation if the officers had probable cause to arrest them for any crime — even if the crime in question was minor and the real reason for the arrest was that the officer didn’t like the person’s speech.
As a criminal defense lawyer Riverside, CA can explain, many towns and cities across California have laws that prohibit common activities such as loitering and jaywalking. Generally, these types of activities do not lead to arrest. However, they can be used as a pretext to arrest people whose speech law enforcement may disagree with, such as during a protest about police brutality.
This decision may empower police to arrest anyone who exercises their free speech rights in public, as the police will often be able to find a reason to arrest a person who is in a public space such as a sidewalk or in front of a government building. Even if the charges are later dropped, the individual will have gone through the system and may face consequences from missing work, publicity, or the trauma of being incarcerated for a period of time.
Lawsuits against police officers and departments for retaliatory arrests are important because they can deter unethical behavior. If citizens can be arrested for exercising their free speech rights — including filming the police — without any liability on the part of the police, then there is no reason for the police to not engage in this behavior. This will drastically limit the ability of the average American to engage in free speech.
The Court did carve out an exception to this rule. If the police did have probable cause to arrest an individual, he or she can still win by showing that the police typically exercise their discretion to not arrest others in similar circumstances. For example, if you were arrested for jaywalking and the police have not made a jaywalking arrest for several years, that may be sufficient to demonstrate that your arrest was made in retaliation for your speech.
If you are arrested because you were protesting, filming the police, or simply because the police did not like what you were wearing, you will need a criminal defense lawyer Riverside, CA to represent you. The Chambers Law Firm is skilled at working with clients throughout California, defending their rights and their freedom. Contact us today at 714-760-4088 or dchambers@clfca.com to schedule a free initial consultation.
