The New York State Right to Record Act ("NYS RTRA"), enacted on July 14, 2020, provides that "[a] person not under arrest or in the custody of a law enforcement official has the right to record law enforcement activity and to maintain custody and control of that recording and of any property or instruments used by that person to record law enforcement activities..."
The law does, however, prohibit conduct that physically interferes with police activity or otherwise constitutes criminal obstruction.
Despite the statute, the NYPD Patrol Guide has long taken a different approach. The Department's policy states that while members of the public may generally record police activity, "Members of the public are not allowed to photograph and/or record police activity within Department facilities," and authorizes officers to direct individuals to stop recording and arrest them if they refuse.
That conflict ultimately sparked a federal lawsuit.
On April 4, 2023, and again on June 1, 2023, SeanPaul Reyes — better known online as the "Long Island Auditor" — was arrested while recording inside NYPD precincts.
On July 24, 2023, Reyes filed suit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, alleging that the NYPD's "No Recording Procedure" violated the First Amendment, the New York State Right to Record Act, and the New York City Right to Record Act.
According to Reyes' complaint, he wished to continue investigating and documenting NYPD activity but feared future arrests if he did so.
Reyes therefore sought a preliminary injunction prohibiting the NYPD from enforcing its anti-recording procedure and requiring the Department to remove "No Recording" signs posted inside precincts.
In November 2023, United States District Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke rejected Reyes' First Amendment theory at the preliminary stage, but agreed that Reyes had demonstrated a likelihood of success under New York's state and city Right to Record laws.
Judge Clarke issued an injunction barring the NYPD from enforcing its anti-recording policy in precinct lobbies and directing the Department to remove "No Recording" signs.
"The City has made a colorable showing that privacy, security and safety concerns are implicated by recording in police precincts," Judge Clarke wrote. "Those interests, however, are not so great that they outweigh the enforcement of clear laws duly passed by elected state and city officials."
She continued:
> "Without an injunction, Plaintiff faces a choice between pursuing filming the police — something that New York law unequivocally permits him to do — or being arrested because of NYPD's continued enforcement of this Procedure."
The City appealed.
Although the Second Circuit declined to halt Reyes' relief entirely, it narrowed the injunction so that it protected Reyes specifically rather than automatically applying to everyone statewide. Later, in June 2025, the appeals court agreed that Reyes had demonstrated irreparable harm but concluded that the central issue turned on an unresolved question of New York law: whether the Right to Record Acts actually protect recording inside publicly accessible areas of police precincts. Instead of answering that question itself, the Second Circuit certified the issue to New York's highest court and reserved decision pending that court's answer.
This week, the New York Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in what may become one of the most significant "Right to Record" cases in state history.
The outcome could determine whether citizens and journalists may lawfully record police activity inside publicly accessible areas of NYPD facilities — or whether police departments can carve out broad exceptions inside their own buildings.
Oral arguments may be viewed here:
A written decision is expected in the coming months.
To join the FAA News community click here. It's a private group. No one will see your number.
No comments:
Post a Comment