Update. "Filming #ICE agents is a #FirstAmendment right. So why might it land you in jail?"
https://san.com/cc/filming-ice-agents-is-a-first-amendment-right-so-why-might-it-land-you-in-jail/

#DHS says filming law enforcement intrinsically hinders law enforcement. #KristiNoem even calls it "violence" against officers. If true, it would fall into the "interference" exception SCOTUS recognized in Glik v. Cuniffe (2011).

But when DHS and Noem press their absurd claims in court, they lose. "In the ongoing legal battles about whether or not people can legally film ICE activity in public, at least seven federal courts have ruled that it is a First Amendment right to record law enforcement agents in public."

#USLaw #USPol #USPolitics

@petersuber Yes, absolutely true, and...

https://mstdn.social/@ricardoharvin/113478597021193037

@petersuber

„injustice department“

@petersuber Filming ICE? Domestic terrorism. Taking pictures of ICE? Domestic terrorism. Releasing unredacted Epstein Files? Believe it or not, domestic terrorism. Protesting the administration? Domestic terrorism, right away. Overcharging for eggs? Domestic terrorism, right to jail, right away. Undercharging for legal advice? Believe it or not, also domestic terrorism.

@petersuber @AnnaAnthro I thought they wanted to be on camera, isnt that why they sent dr phil out with them, and publish propaganda videos of arrests?

so the official subjective narrative in video is fine, but an objective, unedited perspective, that's "terrorism", sure

@petersuber In Germany, some banks have recently debanked left-leaning organizations, probably after the US government used the term terrorism so loosely against antifa.
This playbook means: Not the state will charge someone for a non-existent crime after videos of police brutality make their rounds, but platforms in Trumps butt will deplatform the people that upload such videos, making it more effective censorship than a state agency could ever achieve.