H.Con.Res. 298House111th Congress (2009-2011)In Committee

Expressing the sense of Congress that the videotaping or photographing of police engaged in potentially abusive activity in a public place should not be prosecuted in State or Federal courts.

Legislative Activity

Stay on top of the latest movement without scrolling through every action

4 earlier actions

HouseCommittee Latest Action

Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts and Competition Policy.

Courts, Intellectual Property, Artificial Intelligence, and the Internet Subcommittee

July 26, 2010

View full timeline

HouseIntro Referral

Introduced in House

July 15, 2010

HouseIntro Referral

Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

Judiciary Committee

July 15, 2010

HouseIntro Referral

Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1387-1388)

July 21, 2010

HouseCommittee

Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.

Crime and Federal Government Surveillance Subcommittee

July 26, 2010

HouseCommittee

Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts and Competition Policy.

Courts, Intellectual Property, Artificial Intelligence, and the Internet Subcommittee

July 26, 2010

Floor Debate

1 member

What members said about H.Con.Res. 298 on the floor

1 Democrat

Rep. Edolphus TownsD-NY-10 · Jul 21, 2010

Madam Speaker, I rise today to discuss a phenomenon that is occurring throughout this country. Various states and municipalities are using state wiretapping statutes and other local laws to prosecute…

Madam Speaker, I rise today to discuss a phenomenon that is occurring throughout this country.

Various states and municipalities are using state wiretapping statutes and other local laws to prosecute individuals who photograph or videotape officers in the line of duty. According to a recent Washington Post article, Mark Graber, a 25 year old staff sergeant for the Maryland Air National Guard, was arrested for taping an encounter with a state trooper who gave him a ticket for going 80 in a 65 mph zone. Graber accepted his ticket, which he says he deserved. Graber was not indicted by a grand jury for speeding; instead his crime was videotaping and showing his encounter on YouTube. Mr. Graber was charged with violating Maryland's wiretapping statute.

In Tennessee, Scott Conover was arrested for unlawful photography when he snapped a picture of a Johnson County sheriff's deputy during a traffic stop.

In the state of Washington, an amateur photographer Bogdan Mohora was arrested for photographing two police officers arresting a suspect.

Authorities contend that wiretapping laws are being violated by individuals who videotape or photograph police on-duty. These officials base their argument on a notion that police have a reasonable expectation of privacy while conducting their work in public.

Our police officers play a vital role in maintaining the quality of life in communities across the country. I feel we should not do anything to diminish their role in society or their effectiveness in fighting crime and preventing terrorist acts. As a member of the victims right caucus here in Congress, I want to make sure our police officers are equipped and feel supported, so they can make sure there are less victims of crime in this country. However, while I do support our law enforcement officials, I do not think that they have a right to

privacy while performing their duties in public. As a result of my view, I do not believe that prosecuting citizens for exercising a constitutionally protected right is a proper use of the justice system.

I ask for your support of H. Con. Res. 298 to bring awareness to this startling abuse of power and waste of taxpayer dollars.

Bill Text

Latest available legislative text

Reading Mode

Raw Text PDF XML

Introduced in HouseIssued July 15, 2010

111th CONGRESS

2d Session

H. CON. RES. 298

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

July 15, 2010

Mr. Towns submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of Congress that the videotaping or photographing of police engaged in potentially abusive activity in a public place should not be prosecuted in State or Federal courts.

Whereas prosecutors in several States are applying State wiretapping laws in the prosecution of individuals for the videotaping of police engaged in potentially abusive activity;

Whereas State and Federal wiretapping laws were not intended to be used for such charges;

Whereas some police departments have been using national security as a justification for the harassment, charges, or an arrest of individuals, based solely on a citizen recording, with no additional factors considered;

Whereas a study conducted by the U.S. Department of Justice in 2000 indicated that 22 percent of police officers claim their fellow officers sometimes, often, or always use excessive force; and

Whereas the privacy and safety rights of the police officers in the line of duty must be balanced carefully with the public’s right to transparency and accountability of public servants: Now, therefore, be it

That it is the sense of Congress that—

(1)

citizen recording fills in gaps in existing checks against law enforcement abuses, when balanced with the needs of law enforcement, police privacy, and citizen privacy;

(2)

national security alone is insufficient justification for harassment, charges, or an arrest for otherwise innocent behavior, such as videotaping; and

(3)

members of the public have a right to observe, and if they choose, to make video or sound recordings of the police during the discharge of their public duties, as long as they do not physically or otherwise interfere with the officers’ discharge of their duties, or violate any other State or Federal law, intended to protect the safety of police officers, in the process of the recording.