AUSTIN, Texas — State Representative Jason Villalba (R-Dallas) is pushing back against critics of a bill he filed that would make it a crime for bloggers and independent journalists to film or photograph police officers. After the bill, HB 2918, was filed, it was the target of criticism from both the right and the left. Villalba has conceded he will make some amendments, but has continued to aggressively defend the bill. This week, the bill was referred to a committee and set for public hearing on March 26.

When the news broke about HB 2918, it was criticized all across the political spectrum, including significant opposition from free speech advocates and activists who monitor police activities, and Villalba has remained largely unrepentant in his defense of the bill. When Breitbart Texas interviewed Villalba about the bill, he insisted that his bill “does not infringe on constitutional rights” or “limit liberty in any way.”

In a statement from the ACLU of Texas provided to Breitbart Texas, Legal and Policy Director Rebecca L. Robertson said, “Texans have a First Amendment right to record police officers in public places as they perform their duties.  Many high-profile incidents of police abuse, like LAPD officers’ beating of Rodney King, would never have been exposed to public scrutiny but for the citizen journalists on the scene who dared to record conduct that they believed was wrong.  HB 2918 would deprive us of an important check against abuse of power by the police.”

As Breitbart Texas reported, HB 2918 amends Section 38.15(1) of the Texas Penal Code, which makes it a crime if anyone “interrupts, disrupts, impedes, or otherwise interferes with a peace officer while the peace officer is performing a duty or exercising authority imposed or granted by law.”

What HB 2918 does is add to the definition of what constitutes “interfering” with an officer’s duties, making it a Class B Misdemeanor to film, record, photograph, or document the officer within 25 feet while that officer is performing his official duties. That distance is extended to 100 feet if the person is carrying  a concealed handgun. There is an exception for news media, but the current language of the bill does not include bloggers, independent journalists, or private citizens, and it is not clear whether online media outlets would be included in the exception either.

An article at The Huffington Post noted the bill’s extraordinarily limited definition of media and the well-established legal precedent that publicly filming police officers was protected by the First Amendment. A poll posted with the HuffPo article asked if recording police officers within 25 feet should be illegal, and in the week since the article was posted, over 85 percent of respondents answered no, filming officers should not be prohibited.

Huffington Post poll

Legal Insurrection writer Amy Miller, who is admitted to practice law in Texas, did a deeper analysis of the legal issues with HB 2918:

Legally, this bill tapdances around the First Circuit decision Glik v. Cunniffe. In Glik, the court held that a man named Simon Glik had the right to videotape police in action in Boston in 2011. Glik saw what he believed to be an instance of inappropriate force, and whipped out his cell phone camera to record it. He stayed about 10 feet away while he was recording, and did not speak to the officers or the arrestee while he was recording the incident.

This bill ignores that precedent, which is surprising considering how much technology has blurred the lines between everyday citizen and “official” reporter…

Why are we drawing such an important legal distinction between a CNN employee with a $5000 camera, and a citizen journalist with a $100 GoPro? Non-journalists are hit with a double burden that “official” journalists don’t have to shoulder if they want to get a good shot. This is the real problem, and the point that constituents should bring up when they press Villalba on the issue. 

Conservative talk radio host Chad Hasty wrote a blog post titled “Villalba’s No Good, Very Bad Proposal,” which called the bill “a disgrace.” David Jennings penned an op-ed for The Houston Chronicle that accused Villalba of seeking to suppress the First and Second Amendments:

I thought that Republicans were supposed to be the protectors of liberty, free speech, and the 2nd Amendment. Right? Well, not if you are Rep. Jason Villalba (144-Dallas). It seems that Rep. Villalba, in an attempt to please “the good men and women in blue”, has decided that the First and Second Amendments need to be tossed aside…

In typical Villalba fashion he is not backing down and is unapologetic for his attempt to suppress free speech and gun rights. I find it very interesting that he targets concealed carry permit owners, statistically one of the least criminal groups you can find. Villalba wants you to move 25 feet away from an officer to film but if you are legally carrying a concealed weapon, he wants you 100 feet away. Both are egregious violations of our rights, I’m just curious why he doesn’t like concealed permit owners.

Likewise, Brett Sanders, who frequently writes about police accountability issues, called HB 2918 “an egregious violation of free speech under the United States and Texas Bill of Rights.” Sanders noted that Villalba was directly attacking how new technologies empowered citizen journalists to hold their government accountable, which was something that the founder of this website, Andrew Breitbart, enthusiastically supported.

“Thanks in large part to the smart phone revolution,” said Sanders, “the majority of individuals are armed with some sort of recording device that can capture video images of police activity, for better or for worse. This technology, coupled with social media allows individuals to share information that traditional media couldn’t possibly capture live, and share with the entire world with just a few taps on their phone.”

The Free Thought Project blog also criticized Villalba for limiting citizens’ abilities to hold police accountable:

What’s clear is that filming law enforcement in the commission of their duties has been established as “free speech” under the 1st Amendment of the Constitution.

Follow Sarah Rumpf on Twitter @rumpfshaker.