Navigating Your Rights: A Guide to Avoiding Arrest During First Amendment Audits

Introduction

While the goals of First Amendment audits are laudable , informing citizens of their rights and deterring official misconduct , these encounters carry real risks. Auditors have frequently been detained or arrested by police, and there are documented cases of auditors being assaulted, having their camera equipment confiscated or destroyed, or even facing deadly force. For example, some auditors have had weapons aimed at them or have been shot at during confrontations, and at least one high-profile auditor’s home was later raided by a SWAT team after an incident. Even when violence is not involved, an auditor may find themselves handcuffed and charged with offenses like disorderly conduct, trespassing, or obstruction , sometimes as retaliation for the recording. Confiscation of cameras or phones is another concern; officers have in some cases seized devices or demanded footage, and there have been instances of police deleting recordings (which is illegal, as we’ll discuss). Clearly, without proper preparation, a First Amendment audit can lead to equipment loss, criminal charges, or personal harm , the opposite of the movement’s intent.

The key to avoiding arrest or negative outcomes during a First Amendment audit is thorough preparation and a clear understanding of your rights. By educating yourself on the legal framework , what the Constitution and courts say about recording public officials , and by planning your audits carefully, you can assert your rights confidently yet responsibly. This guide will walk through the relevant law (from the First Amendment to state-specific statutes) and provide practical tips for where you can film, how to conduct yourself, and what pitfalls to avoid. The goal is to help auditors exercise their rights safely and lawfully, minimizing the chance of arrest while still holding government accountable. In doing so, auditors can foster civic engagement and constitutional awareness without courting unnecessary conflict.

Before diving in, remember that no preparation can eliminate all risk , some officials may react poorly no matter what , but being informed will greatly improve your odds of a successful audit. Think of this as “know your rights 101” for auditors: a comprehensive roadmap to navigate the line between your freedoms and the legal limits, so you can accomplish the core mission of First Amendment audits , education and accountability , while avoiding the kinds of mistakes or misunderstandings that lead to arrest or worse.

The Legal Framework

First Amendment audits implicate several fundamental constitutional rights. Understanding the legal framework , especially the First Amendment’s protections for recording, and related rights under the Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments , is essential. This section explains why you generally have the right to film in public, which court rulings have affirmed this right, what the Department of Justice (DOJ) has said about it, and how other key rights (like freedom from unreasonable searches and the right to remain silent) apply during an audit.

First Amendment , The Right to Record Public Officials

• First Circuit (New England) , In Glik v. Cunniffe (1st Cir. 2011), the court held that a citizen’s right to film “government officials in public spaces” is a well-established liberty. This explicitly includes filming and audio recording police carrying out their duties in public. The First Circuit affirmed that openly recording an arrest on Boston Common was protected by the First Amendment.
• Third Circuit (Mid-Atlantic) , In Fields v. City of Philadelphia (3rd Cir. 2017), the court likewise ruled that there is a First Amendment right to film and audio record police officers performing their official duties in public. The Third Circuit noted that recording police is integral to informed public discussion of government affairs.
• Fourth Circuit (Mid-Atlantic/Southeast) , In Sharpe v. Winterville (4th Cir. 2023), the court held that individuals have a First Amendment right not only to record police encounters but even to livestream their own traffic stops. The Fourth Circuit agreed with its sister courts that the First Amendment “covers recording…[of] police encounters” because creating and disseminating information about government activities is core protected speech. (Notably, the Fourth Circuit limited the officers’ liability on other grounds, but the right to record was clearly recognized.)
• Fifth Circuit (South Central) , In Turner v. Driver (5th Cir. 2017), the court confirmed a First Amendment right to record police, noting that filming police is subject only to reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions (e.g. you must not interfere). The Fifth Circuit did caution that officers might still have qualified immunity depending on when a given incident occurred (Turner himself didn’t win damages because the right wasn’t “clearly established” in that circuit at the time of his 2015 incident), but the court prospectively made the right clear going forward.
• Seventh Circuit (Midwest) , In ACLU of Illinois v. Alvarez (7th Cir. 2012), involving a challenge to Illinois’ eavesdropping law, the court held that the First Amendment protects the audio and video recording of police performing duties in public. The Seventh Circuit emphasized that government cannot criminalize the creation of speech (the recording) when the content of that recording , discussing or publishing police conduct , is protected.
• Ninth Circuit (West Coast) , The Ninth Circuit has recognized the right to record police at least since Fordyce v. Seattle (9th Cir. 1995). More recently, in Askins v. DHS (9th Cir. 2018), the court reiterated that photography and filming in public places, including of law enforcement, is protected First Amendment activity. (The Ninth Circuit covers western states, and its rulings have protected recording of federal officers as well, such as Border Patrol at checkpoints.)
• Tenth Circuit (Mountain States) , In Irizarry v. Yehia (10th Cir. 2022), the court joined the consensus, expressly holding that there is a First Amendment right to film the police performing their duties in public. The case involved an officer who tried to block a man’s camera and shine a flashlight into it; the Tenth Circuit found that was interference with protected activity. Importantly, the Tenth Circuit denied the officer qualified immunity, noting that the “clearly established” right to record police can be recognized by the persuasive weight of other circuits even absent Supreme Court precedent.
• Eleventh Circuit (Southeast) , In Smith v. City of Cumming (11th Cir. 2000), the court stated that “the First Amendment protects the right to gather information about what public officials do on public property, and specifically, a right to record matters of public interest” , including police activities. The Eleventh Circuit and its lower courts have repeatedly upheld the right to record police on duty, and even cited it as “clearly established” in recent cases (e.g. Toole v. Atlanta, 11th Cir. 2019).

In fact, as of 2023, the First Amendment right to record police in public is recognized in the vast majority of the United States. The states covered by the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 7th, 9th, 10th, and 11th Circuit Courts of Appeals (at least 32 states, plus D.C. under the D.C. Circuit’s similar stance) have appellate precedent affirming this right. Only a couple of federal circuits have yet to directly rule on the issue, and none have outright rejected the right. (The Eighth Circuit, covering states like Missouri and Minnesota, had a 2017 panel decision that the right was not “clearly established” there at that time, but even that court acknowledged the growing consensus and has since favorably cited those other rulings.) The U.S. Supreme Court has not issued a direct decision on recording police, but it has repeatedly upheld robust First Amendment protection for gathering information on public officials. For example, the Court has said there is a “paramount public interest in a free flow of information…concerning public officials”, which certainly encompasses citizen recordings.

Bottom line: Filming government officials , especially police , in public is a well-established First Amendment freedom. This doesn’t mean anything goes (reasonable time/place/manner rules apply, as discussed later), but the act of recording is protected. As the Department of Justice affirmed in a 2012 guidance letter, “Private individuals have a First Amendment right to record police officers in the public discharge of their duties.” Interfering with or retaliating against someone for exercising that right violates the Constitution.

DOJ Guidance and Federal Policy on Recording

The U.S. Department of Justice has taken the position that citizens’ right to record the police is not only protected, but beneficial for society. In 2012, amid a series of lawsuits over police destroying recordings, the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division sent a letter to the Baltimore Police Department explicitly instructing them to respect public filming of officers. The DOJ warned that officers who seize or destroy recording devices without due process violate the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments (in addition to the First). They recommended police departments adopt clear policies affirming the right to record and training officers not to obstruct cameras.

Some key points from DOJ and related federal guidance:

• Recording is not a crime: Officers should be told that a person photographing or videotaping in public “does not amount to interference” by itself. In the DOJ’s words, “an individual’s recording of police activity from a safe distance…does not amount to interference. Nor does…expressing criticism of the police…amount to interference.” Citizens can verbally object or criticize while filming, and that alone is protected (so long as they are not physically impeding officers).
• No deletion or destruction: The DOJ made clear that police may not destroy cameras or delete footage under any circumstances. Doing so is a violation of the Fourth Amendment (unreasonable seizure of property) and Fourteenth Amendment (deprivation of property without due process). There is no legal justification for erasing a citizen’s recordings, even if an officer believes the device contains evidence , the proper procedure is to obtain a warrant or use legal channels, not summary destruction.
• Seizure only with cause: Except in rare situations, officers must not confiscate cameras or demand to view footage without a warrant. The DOJ advised that police should be trained that they need either consent or a valid warrant to take a recording device. (One limited exception might be exigent circumstances where the evidence is at immediate risk of being lost and there’s probable cause , but grabbing someone’s phone just because they filmed the police is not lawful. We will discuss search/seizure in the next section.)
• Define ‘interference’ narrowly: The DOJ urged agencies to define what actually constitutes interference if they have a policy allowing officers to stop a recording that truly interferes with police work. For example, an officer may have grounds to move someone who is physically intruding into an active crime scene or attempting to distract an officer in a dangerous situation. But someone standing at a reasonable distance, quietly filming or even speaking criticism, is not interfering. By clarifying this, departments can avoid bogus “interference” arrests. (One concrete suggestion: require a supervisor’s approval before any officer takes action to stop a person recording, to ensure it’s truly necessary.)

Federal support for the right to record isn’t limited to memos. In response to cases and publicized incidents, many law enforcement leaders have accepted that “the use of a recording device alone is not grounds for arrest, unless other laws are violated,” as the International Association of Chiefs of Police noted in a training bulletin. The First Amendment has essentially become part of modern police procedure: officers are increasingly trained that bystanders will film them and that this is lawful oversight. As long as you, the auditor, remain within lawful bounds, police interference with your recording not only lacks legal basis , it could make them liable for violating your rights.

Fourth Amendment , Freedom from Unreasonable Searches and Seizures

The Fourth Amendment protects you against unreasonable searches and seizures of your person or property. During a First Amendment audit, the Fourth Amendment is most relevant when it comes to police demands to identify you or to confiscate/search your recording equipment.

• Seizure of Cameras/Phones: As mentioned above, officers generally cannot seize your camera or phone without a warrant or a lawful arrest. Your recordings are your property; taking them or looking through them is a seizure/search under the Fourth Amendment. The DOJ’s stance is unequivocal: “officers violate individuals’ Fourth…Amendment rights when they seize and destroy such recordings without a warrant or due process.” In practical terms, unless an officer has probable cause to believe your device contains evidence of a crime and exigent circumstances (or a warrant), they should not be taking your camera. Even if you are arrested for some other reason, the Supreme Court has ruled that police must obtain a warrant to search the digital contents of a phone (see Riley v. California, 2014). The same logic applies to a camera’s memory card. Politely remind officers that you do not consent to any search of your digital files, and that a warrant is required.
• Confiscation vs. Evidence Collection: If police believe your video has captured evidence of a crime by someone else, they still must follow legal process (such as subpoenaing a copy of the video later) , they cannot simply grab your device and review or delete files. Any destruction of your footage is not only a First Amendment issue but a blatant Fourth Amendment violation as an unreasonable seizure. There have been lawsuits where departments paid out because officers smashed or erased cameras; the law is on your side here.
• Stops and Demands for ID: The Fourth Amendment also requires that any police detention (stop) be based on reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. During audits, police might approach and question you simply because you are filming. Remember: photography is not a crime, so by itself that should not create reasonable suspicion. If an officer detains you, they must be able to point to specific facts suggesting you’re involved in a crime , not merely say “you’re filming a government building, that’s suspicious.” In many documented audit encounters, officers have realized that recording in public is lawful and therefore not grounds for a detention or search.
• Identification laws: Whether you must show ID to police upon request depends on state law (discussed more in Section IV). Under the Fourth Amendment, even in so-called “Stop and ID” states, an officer must first have lawful grounds to detain you (reasonable suspicion) before demanding ID. If you are not being detained or arrested, you generally do not have to identify yourself. A helpful tactic is to calmly ask, “Officer, am I free to go, or am I being detained?”. If they say you’re free to go, you can walk away (and you are not required to answer questions or show ID in that scenario). If they say you are detained, you can inquire, “What is the reason or suspected crime?”. This puts the onus on the officer to articulate a legal basis. Many times during audits, this simple question makes it clear the officers have no lawful reason , at which point continuing to detain you or demand ID could violate your Fourth Amendment rights.
• Search of your bags or person: Likewise, unless you’re under arrest or there is probable cause of a weapon (just filming is not a weapon or contraband!), an officer should not be rifling through your backpack or pockets. You do not have to consent to any search of yourself or your belongings. It’s your right to say, “I do not consent to a search.” If the officer has lawful grounds (e.g. they saw a weapon), they may pat you down for safety, but they cannot use your refusal to consent as a basis for any arrest , refusal is your right.

In summary, the Fourth Amendment protects auditors from unreasonable intrusions. Practically, this means you should maintain control of your equipment (use straps or mounts so it’s not easily snatched), politely refuse any searches, and clarify whether you’re free to go. If police do seize your camera or phone unlawfully, do not resist physically, but make clear you object , and know that you may have legal recourse later for that seizure. (The DOJ letter led to Baltimore Police revising their policy to state citizens have an “absolute right” to record and that officers cannot confiscate devices except as evidence with proper procedure. Those principles apply broadly.)

Fourteenth Amendment , Due Process and Equal Protection

The Fourteenth Amendment is a catch-all for ensuring states respect your fundamental rights. Two aspects are relevant to First Amendment audits:

• Due Process (and property rights): If police take your property or footage, the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause is implicated. As noted, destroying a recording without giving you any recourse is a deprivation of property without due process. Even aside from the Fourth Amendment, this makes it unconstitutional. In the Sharp v. Baltimore case, the DOJ argued the police violated due process by deleting a citizen’s videos of an arrest. Due process also means if your camera is taken as evidence, you are entitled to legal procedures to get it back , it shouldn’t simply “disappear.” Auditors should be aware that any time the government wants to deprive you of property or liberty, you have procedural rights. For example, if you’re banned from a public building after an audit (it happens), you may have a right to a hearing to challenge that.
• Equal Protection / Retaliation: The Fourteenth Amendment can also come into play if auditors are targeted for enforcement based on animus. For instance, if a local ordinance is applied harshly to “auditors” but not to other people doing the same thing, that selective enforcement could violate equal protection. More commonly, retaliation for filming can be pursued under 14th/First Amendment combined theories (Section 1983 civil rights suits often cite both). In short, police cannot single you out for adverse treatment simply because you exercised your First Amendment rights , that’s a form of retaliation that courts disallow, as it chills free speech.

In practice, if you believe you were arrested or cited because you filmed (and not because of any legitimate crime), that is something the Fourteenth Amendment , via a civil rights lawsuit , may help remedy. The DOJ’s involvement in supporting citizens like Mr. Sharp in Baltimore underscores that the federal government views deleting footage or punishing someone for filming as a serious constitutional wrong.

Fifth Amendment , Right to Remain Silent (Self-Incrimination)

First Amendment audits often involve interactions with police, and you should remember that you have a Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate yourself or answer questions that could be used against you. This is colloquially known as the “right to remain silent.”

• You do not have to answer questions. If an officer starts asking, “Why are you filming? What’s your name? What are you doing here?” you are not obligated to answer, aside from identifying yourself if lawfully required (again, state-dependent). Many auditors choose to engage minimally or practice the “silent audit” , remaining completely silent during the encounter. This can be a powerful way to avoid saying anything that could be twisted or used to justify an arrest. Keep in mind, staying silent cannot legally be the sole basis for charges. An officer might threaten you with “failure to comply” or “obstruction” for not answering, but courts have consistently held that citizens have the right to not speak to police. (One narrow exception: in Stop and ID states, refusing to give your name during a valid Terry stop could be a misdemeanor , see Section IV. But you still need not answer other questions.)
• Invoke it out loud if necessary. If you wish to remain silent, you might calmly state: “Officer, I am going to remain silent. I am exercising my Fifth Amendment right not to answer questions.” Once you’ve said this, police should cease questioning. Even if they continue, you can just stay quiet or repeat that you’re invoking your rights. Notably, your silence cannot be used as evidence of wrongdoing. The Fifth Amendment exists to prevent people from being coerced into incriminating themselves.
• Don’t volunteer more than necessary. In an audit scenario, it’s usually wise not to engage in a detailed back-and-forth. Many auditors provide only minimal information (“I’m just taking pictures, officer”) or none at all. While being polite (First Amendment doesn’t protect against the consequences of truly threatening or aggressive speech), you should avoid admitting to anything unlawful or giving excuses that could backfire. For example, if an officer accuses you of some violation, you don’t need to explain yourself on the spot , that’s what courts are for. It’s often best to say nothing or a simple phrase like “I’m not doing anything illegal” and leave it at that.
• Miranda and arrest: If you are arrested, officers should read you your Miranda rights before any custodial interrogation (“you have the right to remain silent…” etc.). Regardless of whether they do, do not waive your rights. It’s usually recommended to explicitly say, “I want to remain silent and I want a lawyer.” That invokes both your Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights and should stop questioning. In the context of an audit, arrests are often for minor charges where police might not even bother interrogating you , but it’s good to know.

In summary, the Fifth Amendment is your friend during an audit encounter. Many auditors have avoided escalating situations by simply not answering baiting questions or by refusing to consent to incriminating themselves. Remember, you’re auditing to test official behavior, not to give the police information to use against you. You cannot be penalized for calmly asserting your right to silence , any attempt to do so (like charging you with obstruction solely for silence) would likely be thrown out as unconstitutional.

---

Regional Differences and State Laws: While the U.S. Constitution provides the baseline of rights discussed above, be aware that specific state laws and interpretations can vary. For example, some states have “stop and identify” statutes requiring you to give your name if police have reasonable suspicion of a crime. About 26 states have such laws, whereas in the others you generally don’t need to show ID if not driving. Likewise, state wiretapping or eavesdropping laws differ: a few states (such as Massachusetts and Illinois in the past) required all-party consent to record audio, which led to controversial arrests of people recording police. However, courts have struck down or carved out exceptions to many of these laws when it comes to recording on-duty officials. The First Circuit, for instance, noted that Massachusetts’ all-party consent law cannot be applied to prohibit openly recording police in public. To be safe, if you are in a two-party consent state, it’s wise to record openly (not secretly) during an audit , hold your camera or phone in plain view so no one can claim you illegally “bugged” a private conversation. In nearly all cases, audio recording the police in public is legal, because officers have no expectation of privacy in their public duties and you are a party to any conversation they have with you.

Finally, note that no constitutional right is absolute. Time, place, and manner restrictions (like reasonable distance requirements, permit rules for large protests, etc.) can limit how rights are exercised. The key is that any restriction must be content-neutral, narrowly tailored, and leave open alternative ways to communicate. Throughout this guide, we’ll highlight how to stay within lawful limits , for example, by keeping a reasonable distance (to avoid “interference”) and by honoring legitimate restrictions (like not going into truly private areas). Knowing the legal framework means you’ll recognize when an order from police is lawful or not, and you’ll know how to respond. Next, we turn to the practical question of where you can and cannot film during an audit, which often is a source of confusion and conflict.

Where You Can and Cannot Film

A critical part of planning a First Amendment audit is understanding where you have the right to film versus locations or scenarios that could land you in trouble. Not all public places are equal in the eyes of the law. This section will explain the types of forums (public, limited, non-public) and give specific examples , from sidewalks and parks to post offices, courthouses, and military bases , to clarify where you can confidently record and where you should exercise caution. We’ll also discuss the role of signage and boundaries (like public easements or “no photography” signs) in determining permissible filming areas.

Traditional Public Forums (Streets, Sidewalks, Parks)

Traditional public forums are places that by long tradition or government fiat have been open for public expression and assembly , the classic examples are streets, sidewalks, parks, and public squares. In these areas, your right to film and photograph is at its strongest. If you are standing on a public sidewalk or in a park, lawfully present in a place open to the general public, you can record anything in plain view. This includes government buildings visible from the outside, police officers performing duties on the street, passing traffic, other people in public, etc. There is no expectation of privacy in a public place, so you are not violating anyone’s privacy by filming what they do or say in public earshot.

From a legal standpoint, the government’s ability to restrict filming in traditional public forums is very limited. They can impose reasonable “time, place, and manner” restrictions (for instance, a city could enforce a noise ordinance or block off a street for construction, affecting where you can stand, etc.), but they cannot single out filming or photography for special prohibition without a compelling reason. Recording is generally a peaceful, non-disruptive activity , as long as you are not obstructing others’ passage or creating a hazard, you have as much right to be there with a camera as a tourist or any passerby.

Tips for traditional forums:

• You may set up a camera on a public sidewalk and film a government facility across the street, and this is lawful. Police cannot demand you move along unless you are actually blocking pedestrian or vehicular traffic (in which case they’d ask anyone to move, camera or not).
• If a private security guard or property owner approaches you while you’re on the sidewalk outside their building, politely inform them this is public property and you’re exercising your right to film. Private entities sometimes mistakenly think they can forbid filming of their building from outside , they cannot. (Be aware some sensitive locations like certain federal installations might try to use other laws, but generally, open public vantage point = OK.)
• Remain mindful of not impeding others: For example, if you’re on a narrow sidewalk, don’t spread out equipment that forces people into the street. Not only is that unsafe, it could give an officer a valid reason to ask you to adjust your position (not because of filming per se, but due to obstructing the sidewalk).
• You can film government officials performing duties in these public spaces , e.g., a traffic stop on a street, or city workers repairing a sewer line , as long as you don’t step into the middle of the activity. Courts have explicitly protected filming police in such public settings, and even some state laws acknowledge citizens can observe police so long as they stand at a safe distance.

In summary, parks, sidewalks, and streets are your “safe zones” for First Amendment audits. They are the forums most associated with free speech, and any attempt to remove or arrest you merely for filming in these places is highly likely to be unconstitutional. If confronted, you can confidently assert, “This is a public sidewalk (or park). I have the right to record here.” Most law enforcement will recognize that claim when phrased that clearly.

Designated and Limited Public Forums (Public Buildings and Facilities)

Moving beyond open-air public spaces, many audits take place in or around government buildings , such as post offices, libraries, city halls, police stations, courthouses, etc. These are generally places open to the public, but not all areas within them are open for any purpose. Legal doctrine describes designated or limited public forums as government spaces that are opened to the public for specific uses. The rules for filming in these venues can vary depending on the nature of the space and any legitimate restrictions in place.

Let’s break down a few common audit locations:

• Public Building Lobbies and Entrances: Areas like the lobby of a city hall, DMV, or police station are typically open to the public for conducting business. They are not traditional free speech zones like a park, but courts have often treated them as limited public forums , the public is invited in, but usually for the purpose of accessing services or information. Generally, filming is allowed in public lobby areas so long as you are not disrupting the facility’s operations. For instance, many auditors film the brochures on display, any posted rules, the interactions at the front desk, etc. If there is no rule posted against photography, you’re likely within your rights to film. If a guard or official claims “you can’t film here,” ask politely if there is a law or regulation that prohibits it. Without a clear authority (statute, city code, or administrative rule), an official’s discomfort is not grounds to stop you.
• Example: City Hall lobby , If you’re quietly filming architectural features or how the permit counter operates, that’s generally fine. If you start haranguing staff or following individuals into private offices, that crosses into disruption or non-public areas (not allowed). Many city halls pass audits by simply allowing filming of publicly accessible areas without issue.

• Public Meetings and Chambers: If you attend a city council meeting, school board meeting, or other open public meeting, those are usually governed by “open meetings” laws that often permit filming or at least do not forbid it. Since those meetings are public by law, you typically may record the proceedings (indeed, many are recorded officially). Check your state’s open meeting statutes , some explicitly allow anyone to record or broadcast public meetings. The caveat is you cannot be disruptive (e.g., using bright lights or noisy equipment might be regulated). But content-wise, you’re allowed to capture what is said and done. A limited public forum like a meeting might impose rules like “no speaking out of turn,” but filming from your seat is generally acceptable.
• Libraries, Museums, etc.: Public libraries are an interesting case , they are public institutions but not places for unrestricted expressive activity (quiet study is the norm). Many libraries don’t have explicit policies on filming; some may have rules to protect patron privacy. Courts have not fully settled libraries’ status , they might be considered limited public forums where the library can enforce reasonable rules to prevent disturbances. Filming quietly in a library (e.g., the general space) might be tolerated, but filming other patrons or staff close-up could prompt objections. If asked to stop in a library, consider the context: Are you potentially bothering patrons? If you refuse, they might cite you for disturbing the peace or ask you to leave for not following facility rules. Legally, the library likely can set rules to preserve a quiet environment (time, place, manner rules), and you should respect those. It’s best to keep any library audit brief and low-key, or focus on publicly relevant areas like bulletin boards or publicly available records. Always comply if they point to a written policy , you can challenge it later through appropriate channels, but in the moment, pressing inside a library could risk a trespass order.
• Post Offices (Poster 7): Post office audits are very common, and fortunately there is a written set of rules (Poster 7) that actually permits photography in certain areas. Poster 7 (officially 39 C.F.R. § 232.1) is usually displayed in post office lobbies. It states: “Photographs for news purposes may be taken in entrances, lobbies, foyers, corridors, or auditoriums when used for public meetings, except where prohibited by official signs or security force personnel or other authorized personnel”. In plain language: you can film in the publicly accessible areas of a post office as long as you are not disrupting business, unless there’s a sign or a supervisor explicitly tells you that you cannot at that moment. Poster 7 adds that other photography (for purposes not “news” or advertising) requires permission from the local postmaster for areas beyond those public zones. Most auditors identify as independent press (news purposes), so they rely on that first clause.

• Practical application: If you audit a post office, you may walk into the lobby, film the PO boxes area, the service counter from the customer side, and any posted signs. Many postal employees are unaware of their own rules and might call postal police or local police. If challenged, politely reference Poster 7, Section (Photographs for News Purposes) which explicitly allows what you’re doing. If an employee or even a police officer insists you stop, you can show them the poster (or a copy of the regulation) and explain you are within your rights as long as you are not causing a disturbance. Be mindful: Don’t film customers’ financial transactions or personal information (e.g., someone writing an address or a credit card number) , not because it’s illegal (it’s publicly visible, technically), but out of courtesy and to avoid complaints that you’re harassing customers. Focus on the facility and the employees (who are public servants).
• If the situation escalates and police threaten arrest, you’ll have to decide whether to stand your ground citing Poster 7 (which usually convinces informed officers) or to leave and address it later. The USPS rules are on your side, but misunderstandings happen. Having a copy of Poster 7 to hand the officer can be very helpful to diffuse the scenario.
• Courthouses and Courtrooms: Courthouses are public buildings but with very strict rules. Federal courthouses (and many state courthouses) do NOT allow cameras or recording devices beyond the lobby security checkpoint. Federal courts have a longstanding ban on photography or video in court proceedings (Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 53 and analogous rules for civil courts). Even in hallways, federal courts often prohibit photography. If you attempt to audit a federal courthouse, expect to be stopped at the entrance if you have obvious recording equipment , U.S. Marshals or court security will enforce the no-camera rule. It is not a First Amendment violation for courts to impose this ban; courts have held that the First Amendment does not guarantee a right to record court proceedings, and concerns about fair trials and witness intimidation often trump any claimed right to film inside courthouses. So do not push the issue inside a courthouse , you will likely have your device confiscated or be removed/arrested for contempt. The sidewalk outside the courthouse, however, is public forum, so you can film the exterior and people coming/going from outside. Just be mindful of security barriers if any.

• State courthouses: Some states allow media or even public recording of certain proceedings with advance permission, but it’s case-by-case. For auditing purposes, assume you cannot film inside without explicit permission. Court lobbies and clerks’ offices: Often, local rules require permission to film even in the lobby. If you audit a courthouse interior, do it very cautiously , better yet, inquire with court staff first about their policy. You might get a pass to film the lobby architecture or posted notices, but if you just walk in filming, security will likely react. Many auditors have been arrested in courthouse audits for violating administrative orders. Those orders are generally upheld as reasonable limitations.
• Recommendation: Unless your goal is specifically to challenge courthouse rules (a high-risk audit), it’s wise to avoid filming inside courthouses. If you do, be prepared to stop if asked and leave to avoid arrest. You can always then challenge the policy through legal channels later, or publicize it if it seems unjust. But on the scene, deputies have authority to remove you for noncompliance and judges can charge contempt.
• Police Stations and Law Enforcement Facilities: Auditing police station lobbies is popular. Many police stations have a public lobby where citizens can request records, file complaints, or wait to speak to an officer. These lobbies are generally open to the public, and you have the right to film your surroundings in them. Police may be uneasy about you filming inside the station, but unless there’s a posted rule (and it would be unusual to have a law banning filming in a public police lobby), you can argue you’re lawfully exercising your rights. Some auditors film forms on the wall (complaint forms, etc.), police insignia displays, or interactions at the front desk. This is allowed as long as you’re not going into restricted areas or filming confidential documents that aren’t publicly visible. However, be aware: police station employees might react defensively, and you could be ordered to leave if they decide you’re causing a disruption. They might cite safety or privacy of victims who come in. Use judgement , if the lobby is empty and you’re quiet, you’re on solid ground. If a distressed citizen is at the desk reporting a crime, it would be courteous and probably wise not to film that person’s face or conversation. Not only is that decent, it removes any claim that you’re violating someone’s privacy or causing emotional distress.
• Jail facilities: Typically, beyond the lobby, everything else (e.g., booking areas, cell blocks) is non-public. Don’t expect to go wandering with a camera. If you want to film the outside of a jail or police parking lot, do so from public vantage (outside any secure fences). Filming police cars in the publicly accessible parking lot may be okay if that lot is publicly open. But if signs say “Police Personnel Only” past a point, don’t cross that line with your camera.

Non-Public (Restricted) Areas

Now we come to spaces where First Amendment rights are minimal because the public simply has no general right of access. Non-public forums include areas like secure government office floors, employee-only back rooms, military bases, etc. In these places, you cannot just walk in and start filming , that would likely be trespassing or worse.

• “Employees Only” Areas: In almost every public building, you’ll see doors marked “Employees Only” or “Restricted Access.” These are off-limits to the public, period. If you slip through or tailgate behind an employee, you are now an intruder. Filming doesn’t grant you permission to enter unauthorized zones. For example, you cannot go past the counter in a post office into the mail sorting area , that’s clearly restricted. If auditing, always stop where the public permission ends. If an employee leaves a door open, that’s not an invitation. Stay behind any counters or within public lobby areas unless you have permission to enter further.
• Security Checkpoints: Some facilities have checkpoints with metal detectors or guards (e.g., federal buildings, courthouses, some city halls). Beyond those, it’s typically controlled space. You might film the checkpoint itself from outside (some auditors do, to see if guards respect the right to film that process), but you won’t be allowed to carry a recording device past the checkpoint if rules forbid it. Federal buildings managed by GSA often have regulations allowing photography in public areas for news purposes, similar to the USPS rules, but local security might still challenge you. If you pass a posted sign at a security entrance saying “No cameras or recording devices beyond this point,” heed it. Violating it could get your device confiscated or you removed. You could later contest whether that policy is valid, but in-the-moment, don’t try to force your way with a camera , it will likely end badly.
• Sensitive Government Sites: Military bases are a prime example of non-public forums. An active military base is federal property where the public has no right to enter without authorization. The military can control all photography on base. If you somehow got on a base with a camera without permission, you risk arrest under federal law and possibly severe consequences (especially if filming sensitive installations). Do not audit inside a military base. Even National Guard armories or reserves centers are usually closed to public entry except maybe an office area , assume you cannot wander in filming.
• From outside the base: It is legal to film from public property outside the perimeter , for instance, filming the gates or signage of a military base from the public road. Many auditors do this. Note though: you will attract attention. Military police or security may confront you, even off base, to inquire what you’re doing (they might cite 1950s-era laws about sketching defense installations, etc., but generally as long as you’re on public land, you’re okay). Remain on public easements (e.g., the sidewalk or public shoulder) and be prepared to identify yourself to base security or local law enforcement if they insist , they might detain you until they’re satisfied you’re not a spy or terrorist. It’s legal to photograph bases, but expect hassle. Tip: Bring a copy of DoD policy (if any) on photography of installations from public land , some auditors have used that to educate MPs. Still, this is an inherently higher-risk audit environment.
• Private Property (and boundary areas): Private property is, by definition, not a public forum. If you go onto private property open to the public (like a store or shopping mall), you are subject to the owner’s rules, and they can ask you to stop filming or leave. If you refuse, you’re trespassing. Many auditors stick to public property only. If you need to step on private land, get permission. For example, if you want to film a government facility from a better angle and a neighboring business’s parking lot offers that view, ask the business if they mind you standing there briefly. Without permission, they could call police to trespass you.

• Public easements and right-of-way: One important concept: sometimes what looks like private property (like the grass in front of someone’s house or a business’s driveway entrance) is actually a public right-of-way or easement for utilities or pedestrian passage. Auditors often stand on those edges to film. It can be legally murky if not clearly demarcated. As a rule of thumb, utility poles, sidewalks, and fire hydrants are often indicators of the public easement boundary. If you stay on the sidewalk or roadside beyond someone’s fence or lawn, you’re likely on public property. But if you tromp across a lawn up to a window, you’re trespassing. If a property owner claims you’re on their property, you can politely assert you believe you’re on the public right-of-way (if you genuinely are). They may still call police. Often police, not being surveyors, will err on the side of asking you to move a few feet just to avoid conflict. Pick your battles , moving a few feet to undeniably public ground (like the paved street shoulder) might be wiser than getting arrested over a property line debate. You can later verify the boundary with county maps if needed.
• Filming private property from public space: This is generally legal. If you’re on the sidewalk filming a private building, the owner might be very unhappy but they have no right to stop you. They cannot demand you delete footage. They can ask you why, but you don’t owe an answer. As long as you remain on the public side, you are within your rights. (One caution: if you use extremely powerful zoom lenses to peer into someone’s window from the street, there could be privacy issues , but for typical auditing, you’re filming exteriors or open areas, which is fine.)
• Poster 7 exceptions and other signage: Earlier we noted Poster 7’s allowance in post offices unless “prohibited by official signs or security personnel.” In any public building, if you see signage explicitly banning photography, take note. Some signs have no legal citation and are just requests (which might not hold up in court), but ignoring them could still lead to a confrontation. Other signs might cite an ordinance or law. For instance, a sign in a public hospital might say “No video recording per HIPAA privacy” , HIPAA is a patient privacy law that applies to medical staff, not to you, but the hospital might have authority to enforce that as a condition of entry. You have to judge whether to test it. Often, security or officials will reference signs or “policy”. Ask to see the written policy or law. If they produce something official, it might be a losing battle at that moment to argue (you could leave and later contact their legal department if you think it’s an overreach).

In summary, know the boundaries. A successful auditor can confidently say, “I’m only in public areas where I’m allowed to be.” The moment you stray into a non-public zone, you lose legal protections and can be lawfully stopped or removed. So as you plan an audit, map out the public areas and do not cross lines (literally and figuratively).

Special Cases Recap:

• Post Offices: Allowed in lobbies under Poster 7; don’t film secure back areas or customers’ private info.
• Courthouses: Filming inside usually prohibited by court rules , not advisable. Outside is fine on public grounds.
• Military Bases: Do not enter; filming from off-base is legal but will attract scrutiny.
• Private Businesses: Need permission to be on their property; filming from sidewalk is okay.
• Public Easements: Often safe to use for filming, but be prepared to explain that to police if property owners complain.
• “No Photography” Signs: Consider the legitimacy , obey if it’s backed by law (or face likely removal), possibly challenge later through dialogue or legal means instead of on the spot.

Finally, a word on access laws: Public records and open government laws can sometimes be tangentially relevant. For example, if you want to film documents or records available to the public, you have a right to see them, but sometimes agencies get touchy if you film while looking. Generally, if you can view a record, you can photograph it (that’s how people make copies without paying fees). But if an employee objects, politely assert that since it’s a public record, you are allowed to photograph it for your use. Most states’ laws permit that, though some offices might have rules about scanners or tripods. Use common sense.

Knowing where you can film (and where you cannot) sets the stage for a smooth audit. The next step is being prepared before you ever hit record , from understanding local laws to having the right gear and game plan. Preparation will ensure that when you’re in these public spaces exercising your rights, you’re doing so in the smartest way possible, minimizing misunderstandings with law enforcement or others.

Preparation Before Auditing

Successful audits don’t happen by accident , they result from careful preparation. Before you grab your camera and head out to test your rights, you should do your homework on the laws, equip yourself properly, and have a solid plan. This section covers what to do before conducting an audit, including legal research, gear recommendations, and planning strategies, as well as considerations like whether to go solo or in a group. By preparing thoroughly, you significantly reduce the chance of an avoidable arrest or confrontation.

1. Research Laws and Case Law (Know the Rules in Your Area)

Knowledge is your best defense. Take the time to research both federal case law and your state and local laws before auditing. Key things to look up:

• Federal case law on recording: We summarized many of the major appellate cases in Section II. Look specifically for any cases in your federal circuit or district. If you know what federal courts have said about the right to record, you can confidently cite it if needed. For instance, if you’re in Boston, knowing Glik v. Cunniffe is binding can be a powerful retort if an officer says “you can’t film.” If you’re in a circuit that hasn’t ruled, know the broader persuasive precedent. You don’t need to be a lawyer, but having a few case names and quotes in your back pocket can show officers you’re not just guessing , you truly know your rights.
• State and local laws: ID and stop-and-identify: As mentioned, states vary on whether you must provide ID to police. Learn whether your state is a “stop and identify” state. If it is, find out under what circumstances you must ID (some require it during any Terry stop, others only for loitering or if you’re a driver, etc.). Also, check if your locality has any ordinance about loitering or “prowling.” Some states like Florida and Georgia tie their stop-and-identify to loitering statutes. Practical tip: Print out or save the text of the relevant statute on ID. If an officer wrongly claims you must show ID, you can refer to the law. For example, in a state with no such law, you might say, “With respect, officer, this state has no law requiring me to ID unless I’m being lawfully detained or arrested.” Knowing Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court (the Supreme Court case that upheld stop-and-identify in Nevada) can also help , it basically says you only have to ID when the state law says so and there is reasonable suspicion.
• Eavesdropping/Wiretapping laws: If you are auditing in an all-party-consent state (e.g., Massachusetts, Maryland, Pennsylvania, etc.), read the statute to understand its scope. Many such laws have exceptions or have been interpreted not to apply to on-duty police. For example, the First Circuit ruled Massachusetts’ wiretap law doesn’t apply to openly recording police. Still, it’s wise not to do secret recording in those states. If you plan to use a hidden camera, be very cautious in two-party consent states , it could be legally risky. Open carrying of a camera (which makes the audio recording obvious) is usually safe even in those states. Check if any court in your state has explicitly addressed recording police with respect to wiretapping laws (many have, because this was a hot issue in the 2000s).
• Obstruction and disorderly conduct definitions: These are common charges auditors face. Read your state’s statutes for obstruction of justice, obstruction of governmental administration, or interference with police, as well as disorderly conduct. Note what behavior actually constitutes the offense. Often, the law requires physical interference or doing something that risks public safety. For instance, many disorderly conduct laws require that you were creating a hazardous condition, making unreasonable noise, or engaging in fighting words. Simply filming and refusing to leave usually doesn’t meet the elements , but if you yell profanity in a quiet lobby full of people, some statutes might consider that “unreasonable noise” or disturbing the peace. Knowing the lines will help you stay on the right side of them (e.g., keep your voice at a normal level, don’t block doorways which could be “obstruction” literally).
• Trespass warnings law: Understand how trespass law works in your jurisdiction. If you refuse to leave a public building after being ordered by someone in authority, could that be trespassing? (In some places, yes, if the order is lawful. But if the order itself violates your rights, that gets legally thorny.) Generally, trespass law requires notice , either signs or a direct communication , that you’re not allowed somewhere. For public property, they need a valid reason to bar you (closed hours, you causing disruption, etc.). It’s helpful to know if your state has a specific statute for “disturbing public meetings” or “remaining after being asked to leave” that might be used. Some auditors have been charged with things like “disturbing schools or libraries” under specialized laws.
• Local regulations for specific sites: Check if the county or city has any rules about filming in specific facilities. For example, some counties might have an administrative code section about “no photography on courthouse property without permission.” These can sometimes be found on the courthouse or county website. If such a rule exists, be aware that it could be enforced even if it’s of questionable constitutionality. Forewarned is forearmed , you might choose to avoid that location or prepare to challenge it legally rather than on-site.

In short, arm yourself with legal knowledge. Many auditors even carry a small cheat-sheet or printouts of key laws and cases. When you can quote, for example, “Turner v. Driver, Fifth Circuit 2017, said there is a First Amendment right to record police”, and you know your Texas ID law is only for arrests, not detentions (since Texas is not a stop-and-ID state), you present as someone who cannot be easily intimidated by misinformation. Officers are less likely to bluff you if they realize you might actually know the law better than they do on this topic.

2. Equipment and Technology , Choose the Right Gear

The equipment you use can make a big difference in both the quality of your audit and your personal safety/legal security. Here are some recommendations:

• Primary recording device: Most auditors use a handheld video camera or smartphone. A small handheld camera (like a GoPro, DJI Pocket, or a compact camcorder) is less conspicuous and easier to carry than a big professional rig. It also attracts less negative attention from the public. If you use a smartphone, remember that if police seize it, they might attempt to search it (illegally, but they might) , plus, your phone has lots of personal data. Some auditors prefer a dedicated camera for filming and keep their phone separate to make calls or stream.
• Live streaming capability: Strongly consider a setup that allows live streaming of your video to the internet. This can be done via your smartphone (using apps like YouTube, Facebook Live, etc.) or a camera that pairs to your phone. The reason live streaming is valuable is it preserves your footage in real-time even if your device is taken or destroyed. As many auditors lament, “If it’s not live, it’s not safe.” Police cannot delete a video that’s already been uploaded to the cloud. For example, if you stream to YouTube (even as unlisted), the moment you stop recording the video is stored on your account. There are also apps designed for activists that immediately back up video. This can be your lifesaver if someone unlawfully confiscates your camera; you’ll still have the evidence. Test your streaming setup ahead of time to ensure it works and you know how to quickly start a stream when needed.
• Backup cameras: Some auditors carry more than one camera , e.g., a body camera or pen camera clipped on a shirt as a secondary angle. If your main camera gets knocked out of your hand, a bodycam might still be capturing what happens next. Bodycams (like a small device on your chest or a camera built into glasses) also have the advantage of being hands-free and less noticeable, which can help with the “silent audit” approach. However, remember the note on wiretap laws: if you secretly record audio without being obvious in an all-party consent state, you could face legal issues. To mitigate this, wear the body camera openly (make it visible or make it emit a small blinking light) so it’s clear to observers you are recording. This generally nullifies any claim of “expectation of privacy,” as the ACLU notes , officers or others can see they’re being recorded.
• Audio recording device: In addition to video, some auditors use a separate audio recorder (like a mic or recorder in a pocket) for redundancy. Quality audio is important. If your video camera’s audio fails or wind noise ruins it, a secondary audio recorder might capture clear sound of conversations. This can also back you up in court if the issue is what was said versus what wasn’t.
• Batteries and memory: Audits can be unpredictable in length. Bring extra batteries or a power bank for your devices. There’s nothing worse than your camera dying right when an encounter heats up. Similarly, ensure you have ample storage (memory card space). Offload old footage beforehand so you have plenty of recording time available. If you’re streaming, make sure you have a good data plan and strong signal where you’re going (test in that area if possible).
• Mounts and stabilization: Using a camera gimbal or stabilizer can smooth your footage, but it can also look like a more “professional” setup which might attract attention. Some auditors opt for a simple handheld grip or selfie stick. A wrist strap can be useful so the camera can’t be easily snatched or dropped. If you’re going to stand in one spot for a long time (e.g., filming a building entrance), a tripod might be helpful, but be cautious: a tripod on a sidewalk could be considered an obstruction. If you use one, keep it out of foot traffic and be ready to move it if asked.
• Clothing and visibility: Think about whether you want to stand out or blend in. Some auditors wear brightly colored vests (even labeled “Press” sometimes) to appear professional and clearly engaged in First Amendment activity. This can sometimes cause officers to treat you more as media and less as a “suspicious person.” On the other hand, a vest or big PRESS label also announces you’re doing an audit, which can put officials on high alert. Other auditors prefer casual attire to not immediately tip off everyone. There’s no right or wrong , it’s strategic. If your goal is to be very transparent about what you’re doing, a press vest or ID might help de-escalate interactions (“Oh, they’re press, not a threat”). If your goal is to test reactions or stay low-key at first, normal clothing works. Comfortable shoes and weather-appropriate attire are obvious but important , you might be standing outside for a long time.
• Transportation considerations: Plan how you’ll get to and from the audit site. It might be wise not to park right at the location being audited. Police running license plates of vehicles nearby is not unheard of. If they get your car’s registration, they identify you and could find minor vehicle infractions to hassle you with. Some auditors park a few blocks away and walk to the site, or use public transport or a rideshare to be anonymous. If you do drive, ensure your vehicle is legally parked and your registration/inspection is up to date , don’t give any easy excuses for a ticket or tow. Also, anything visible in your car (like a firearm, if you’re a CCW holder) could escalate things if they notice. Best to keep your car low-profile.
• Friends as camera operators: Consider bringing a fellow auditor or friend to act as a cameraperson at a distance. This person can film you and the overall scene from afar. This serves two purposes: (1) If something happens to you or your camera (like an arrest or confrontation), the other person captures it all as evidence. (2) It can keep officers more accountable, knowing a third party is observing. However, a big group of auditors can sometimes be seen as a “mob” and raise tensions. Often two people is a good number , you have backup, but you’re not a crowd. If you do go in a pair or team, consider staggering your presence (one starts filming and maybe the other arrives later, or stands farther away). That way, if one person is approached, the other can continue recording without being directly involved.
• Phone for emergency: Always have a means to call for help or legal assistance. If you have a lawyer or legal aid number (like the local ACLU chapter, or National Lawyers Guild hotline) keep it handy. In a worst-case scenario (arrest), you want to have someone you can contact or who knows where you are. It’s wise to tell a trusted person your audit plan: where you’ll be and roughly when, so someone is aware in case you don’t check in afterwards.

By gearing up smartly, you not only improve the quality of your audit footage (important if it becomes evidence) but also protect yourself. Redundancy in recording (multiple devices, live backups) can make the difference between vindicating your rights and having it be your word against an officer’s.

One extra note: Check your equipment’s settings , ensure timestamps are correct (set the date/time), maybe enable a feature that stamps the video with date/time if you want that for evidence. Little things like that can add credibility if your video ends up in court.

3. Planning Your Audit Tactics

Going into an audit with a plan will increase your confidence and decrease chances of mistakes. Consider these strategic elements:

• Audit Time and Day: The timing of your visit can influence what happens. Early morning audits (right when a facility opens) can be advantageous because staff are often less busy and fewer public visitors are around. Some auditors choose early hours to avoid causing a scene with lots of bystanders. Also, the officials might be calmer before the day’s pressures mount. On the flip side, early morning might have fewer supervisors present , sometimes a supervisor can resolve an issue peacefully, so that’s a factor. Weekdays vs. weekends: Government offices mostly operate weekdays; if you audit a police station on a weekend, you might encounter more active police operations (like people coming to bail out arrestees, etc.). Think about what you want to capture , a quiet time might yield little interaction (which could be fine if you just want a pass), whereas a busy time might guarantee interaction (for better or worse). Mid-day audits may have more foot traffic, which could mean more citizen questions or complaints (“Why are you filming?” etc.).
• Staggered or Stealthy Arrival: If you audit with a partner or team, consider staggering your arrival and positions. For example, one person could begin filming outside while another comes 10 minutes later and perhaps enters the building. This way, if staff are alerted by the first person and focus on them, the second person might observe how they react or catch different angles. Also, arriving separately avoids looking like a “pack” descending, which can intimidate staff. Some auditors also scout the location first without cameras , a casual walkthrough a day before to note cameras, exits, any posted signs about rules. Then return with cameras later. This isn’t necessary but can be helpful for high-security places to identify where security or officers tend to be.
• Define Your Audit Goal: Know what you want to accomplish or test. Is it primarily an education audit (showing the public they can record in, say, a post office)? Is it an accountability audit (seeing if police respect your rights)? Or are you aiming for content creation (an interesting video)? Your goal might influence how you behave. For instance, if education is the goal, you might be more inclined to explain to people why you’re doing this. If pure accountability test, you might stay silent and not explain at all to truly see if officials know the law without being prompted. Keep your goal in mind so you don’t get sidetracked by ego or emotion in the moment. It’s easy to end up arguing for argument’s sake , but if your goal was simply to not be bothered and they are bothering you, focus on that issue.
• Prepare Responses (or Non-responses): Think through common scenarios and how you will respond. For example, when an employee says “Why are you filming?” , will you answer? Some options: “I’m an independent journalist gathering content for a story.” This is a common and generally effective answer that asserts First Amendment (freedom of press) without giving too much detail. Or you might choose, “I’m just taking pictures in a public place.” Or you could go the silent route and not answer at all. It’s good to decide in advance so you’re not caught off guard. Similarly, if a police officer says “You need to leave,” plan whether you will comply immediately (if it’s an unlawful order, ideally you shouldn’t have to, but refusing might lead to arrest , which maybe you’re prepared for as a test case, or maybe you want to avoid). Have a phrase ready like, “Officer, this is a public lobby. I believe I have the right to be here and film. Are you ordering me to leave under threat of arrest?” That kind of response (asked calmly) does two things: it clarifies the officer’s directive and puts on record that you’re only leaving if it’s an order backed by arrest. Often, this makes officers pause and consider if they have grounds. If they double down and say “Yes, leave or you’re arrested,” then you have a choice to make: leave (live to audit another day, and perhaps file a complaint for the unlawful order), or stay and likely face handcuffs (to later fight it in court). Knowing your own threshold is important , decide beforehand how far you’re willing to push in the field.
• Avoiding Provocations: Many auditors emphasize they are not there to provoke, but to document. In practice, though, some actions can be seen as provocations. For example, pointing your camera deliberately at security cameras or into employee-only doors the moment someone opens them , it might be legal, but it may alarm staff who think you’re trying to record secure areas. If your goal isn’t to breach security but just to test rights, you don’t need to, say, film the keypad of a secure door up close (that could be seen as attempting to get entry codes, etc.). Also, consider your body language: don’t sneak or dart around, as that appears suspicious. Walk normally; if filming outside a building, don’t hide in bushes or wear full camouflage , that will almost guarantee a “suspicious person” call. Auditing is about asserting that normal people can film in public, so present as a normal person (with a camera). Another provocation to avoid is shining lights into windows at night or using zoom to peer at people through windows , that can lead to harassment concerns or even police thinking you’re surveilling for a crime. Stick to plain view and public vantage.
• Vehicle audits and traffic stops: Some auditors intentionally get pulled over (or approach traffic stops). That is a higher-stakes situation due to officer safety concerns. If auditing a traffic stop as a bystander, keep significant distance (outside the immediate scene, maybe 30+ feet) unless the officer invites you closer. If an officer is alone, they might be extra jumpy. Know your state’s law: e.g., California explicitly allows bystanders to film police as long as they are not obstructing; Arizona tried the 8-foot law which was struck down , but as a rule, beyond 8-10 feet is wise unless told otherwise. For auditing police by purposely getting pulled over, be very careful , you’ll be in a confined space and cops have more leeway (they can order you out of the car, etc.). Ensure any firearms or such in car are declared or kept as law requires to avoid a dangerous misunderstanding. That kind of audit ventures into 2nd Amendment territory if you’re carrying, which is a whole other risk factor.
• Informing or not informing authorities ahead: Some auditors let the local police chief or sheriff know they plan to do some public photography, as a way to preempt problems (or to test if that info circulates). Others strictly do not tip off anyone to ensure a genuine reaction. Generally, you wouldn’t announce an audit to the specific facility you’re auditing (that defeats the purpose of testing them unaware). However, if you have a working relationship with an attorney or journalist, sometimes letting them know can help if things go south (they can verify you were doing a First Amendment activity intentionally). Usually, though, audits are done spontaneously to on-site staff.
• Plan for Worst-Case: It may sound pessimistic, but plan as if you might be arrested. This means: have your ID accessible (even if you plan not to give it, have it hidden on you somewhere so if you do get booked, it’s available , not presenting it to police is one thing, but you will have to identify yourself eventually in the legal process or face longer detention). Memorize or have written down a couple of important phone numbers (lawyer, friend) since your phone might be taken. If you have medical needs, have essentials on you. Remove any prohibited items from your person that could complicate an arrest (knife, etc., unless you’re auditing open carry which we’ll cover in section VI , combining weapons with audits is risky). If you drove, ensure your vehicle is legally parked and locked; maybe give a spare key to your partner in case you are taken in, so your car isn’t stranded. This is not to say you expect to be arrested, but being ready for that possibility will make you calmer and more prepared in case it happens.
• Early Release or Confrontation Plan: Discuss with any fellow auditors what to do if one of you is arrested or if police try to split you up. For example, if one person is detained, should the other keep filming from a safe distance and not interfere? (Yes, ideally one remains a witness.) If officers say “you need to leave or you’ll be arrested too,” one strategy is for at least one person to comply and get out with the footage so that evidence is preserved, while the other might take the arrest if they choose to press the issue. Know your roles.
• Calm Mindset: Preparation isn’t just gear and knowledge , it’s also mental. Steady yourself to remain calm and polite. It’s normal to feel adrenaline when approached by authority or angry individuals. By planning ahead, you can lean on that preparation to stay composed. Remember, you are in the right as long as you follow the law; let that confidence guide your demeanor. You’ll be less tempted to shout or panic if you’ve thought through scenarios. Some auditors even practice in front of a mirror or do a “mock audit” with a friend playing the cop, to rehearse their responses. It might sound silly, but it can desensitize you to the pressure.

In summary, preparation before auditing means becoming a mini-expert in your rights, having the right tools ready, and crafting a strategy for the audit itself. This groundwork will drastically reduce the chance of being caught off-guard. When you arrive at the audit location knowledgeable and equipped, you can focus on the task at hand , filming and observing , rather than scrambling to react.

Next, we’ll move to the actual audit execution: how to conduct yourself during the audit to maintain professionalism, assert your rights effectively, and de-escalate (or appropriately escalate) situations as needed.

Conducting the Audit

Now it’s showtime , you’ve done your homework and arrived at your chosen location. How you conduct yourself during the audit is crucial. The goal is to assert your rights without giving police or others any legitimate reason to arrest or stop you. In this section, we outline best practices for behavior and interaction during an audit, including dealing with police orders, interacting (or not interacting) with people, keeping a safe distance, and effectively documenting the encounter from start to finish. The overarching theme is: be professional, be calm, and be steadfast. You want the story to be about your rights and the officials’ behavior, not about you being disorderly or combative.

Key principles to follow while auditing:

• Stay cool, stay polite.
• Do not consent to give up your rights (but also don’t physically resist).
• Narrate and document everything you reasonably can.
• Avoid physical interference or any action that provides a lawful excuse to stop you.

Let’s break these down into concrete practices.

Maintain a Professional Demeanor

Treat an audit as if you’re a journalist or an inspector on duty (indeed, many auditors consider themselves citizen journalists). This mindset will help you remain courteous, confident, and impartial during encounters. Here are some tips:

• Be polite and respectful , especially with law enforcement. You can refuse requests and stand your ground without yelling or insulting. In many audit videos, the auditors who remain calm and courteous under pressure gain credibility with viewers and often defuse the situation with officers. Remember, officers are human; if you start by shouting or cursing at them, you’re essentially daring them to find a reason to lock you up. Importantly, never physically resist or touch an officer. Even if you believe the officer is wrong, physical resistance (pulling away, etc.) can lead to additional charges or danger. Keep your hands visible and non-threatening.
• Use non-confrontational body language. Stand straight, don’t make sudden moves, keep your free hand (the one not holding the camera) visible. If you have sunglasses on, consider removing them when talking to officers so they can see your eyes , it can build a bit of trust. Nod or verbally acknowledge when someone else (police or staff) is speaking, even if you disagree. That shows you’re listening, which can calm an agitated person.
• Adopt a “press” or “observer” attitude. Some auditors find it helpful to slightly emotionally detach , you’re there to observe and record, not to have a personal fight. This can help you narrate or think clearly rather than react with anger if someone says something rude. Think of yourself as a third-party documenting, rather than taking insults personally. If a cop calls you a name or a citizen says you’re “unemployed loser” (it happens), let it roll off. Focus on the task: recording their behavior. A calm, almost businesslike tone from you can often make the other party realize they’re the only agitated one, which might make them self-conscious and back down.
• Identify yourself appropriately (if you choose). If asked “Who are you with?” or “What are you doing?”, you may choose a professional answer like, “I’m an independent journalist” or “I’m gathering content for a story”. You don’t have to give your name or outlet (and many auditors don’t give a name), but using the term “journalist” or “photographer” can sometimes make officials reconsider messing with you, knowing that interfering with news gathering is a serious First Amendment violation. Even if you’re ultimately just a YouTuber, citizen journalism is recognized as legitimate. Of course, if you prefer not to answer at all, that’s also your right (see silent section below). But avoid lying , don’t claim you’re with CNN or a local newspaper if you’re not. Lying can undermine your credibility on camera and, in some cases, might be unlawful (impersonating press isn’t a crime per se, but lying to police in an investigation can be if material , easier to just not lie).
• Use careful language when refusing orders. If you need to refuse an order or request (like “turn off that camera” or “show me ID”), do so in a non-triggering way. For example, instead of “No, I know my rights, buzz off,” you might say, “Officer, I’m not doing anything illegal and I’d prefer not to stop recording. I believe I have the right to continue.” This asserts your right but doesn’t come off as aggressive. If they insist it’s an order, you can politely ask, “Are you saying I’m legally required to stop filming?” Making them spell it out can either cause them to back down or clarify the situation for your documentation. Throughout, keep your voice at a normal volume; no need to scream unless you truly are in danger and trying to alert others.
• Avoid profanity and “fighting words.” It’s worth reiterating: while cursing at police is generally protected speech (Supreme Court in Cohen v. California protected “offensive” words like saying “F the draft” on a jacket), it’s not going to help you avoid arrest in the moment. Some states have broad disorderly conduct laws that police might try to invoke if you curse loudly in public and “alarm” others. Using slurs or truly provocative insults (e.g. attacking personally, “I hope you die,” etc.) could even be seen as threats or incitement. It’s just not wise. Many auditors have found that *the power of an audit comes from the contrast: a calm, polite auditor versus a possibly irate official. If both are shouting and cursing, any neutral observer might just sigh at both of you. Keep the moral high ground.

By maintaining professionalism, you are effectively depriving the authorities of any justification to claim you were being disorderly or disruptive. If an arrest happens despite your good behavior, it will look all the worse for them on camera and in court. Conversely, if you stay professional and the police do too, then great , your audit ends peacefully with everyone respecting each other. That’s a win for civil engagement.

Handle Police Orders and Unlawful Commands Smartly

During an audit, a critical moment is if/when police or officials give you an order that you believe is unlawful , such as “stop filming,” “leave this public area,” or “hand over your camera.” How you handle these commands is often the difference between avoiding arrest and getting arrested. Here’s how to navigate:

• Differentiate requests vs. orders: Sometimes officers ask in a polite way (“Would you mind stepping back?”). Clarify if it’s a request or an order. If it’s phrased as a request, you can choose to decline politely: “I’d prefer to stay where I am, if that’s okay, since I’m not in anyone’s way.” If the officer then says “No, I need you to move back now,” that has morphed into an order. At that point, comply if it’s a reasonable distance/separation request. Choosing battles is key , arguing about moving 5 steps back is not a wise hill to die on. Officers often worry about safety and their scene control; as long as you can still film from slightly further, just do it. You can ask, “Is this far enough, officer?” and typically they’ll be satisfied. Document it vocally: “The officer has instructed me to move back about 20 feet, I am now complying.” This way, your video shows you obeyed a safety request.
• Refusing unlawful orders: If an officer orders something clearly beyond their authority , like “You can’t film, turn that off or I’ll arrest you” , you have a tough choice. The legally correct stance is you do not have to obey an unconstitutional order. However, the practical reality is you might get arrested and have to fight it later. Many auditors choose a middle ground: state your objection, then (if the officer is adamant) comply under protest to avoid escalation, and immediately ask for a supervisor or plan to take legal action later. For example: “Officer, this is a public sidewalk and I have a right to record. Is there a law I’m violating? [If they just repeat order] I believe this order is unlawful, but I will comply now and contest it later. I’d like your name and badge number and a supervisor, please.”. By saying that, you’ve made it known you’re not consenting to the legitimacy of the order , this could help in a civil suit or complaint. Then you step back/turn off camera as ordered (or maybe you secretly keep audio recording in your pocket if you dare). This approach avoids immediate arrest yet preserves your rights for follow-up.
• Some auditors, especially experienced ones, will flat-out refuse and get arrested to make a point. For instance, if told to leave a public building when they know it’s open and they’ve done nothing wrong, they might respond: “I’m sorry, officer, I can’t do that. I have a right to be here. If you’re going to arrest me for trespassing, you’ll be violating your oath.” This is a principled stand , but be absolutely prepared for the consequences if you go this route. It might end with you in cuffs. Only you can assess if that risk is worth it for you in that moment.

• Ask for clarification or a supervisor: A great stalling/diffusing tactic when given an order you believe is unlawful is to calmly ask for clarification or a higher authority. “Officer, could you explain what law or rule I’m violating by filming? I just want to understand.” Sometimes an officer might realize there isn’t one and get uneasy. Or they might spout something bogus; at least you’ll have it on tape (“because I said so” or “you’re trespassing” without cause). You can also say, “Could I speak to your supervisor? I don’t want to disobey, I just believe I have the right to do this.” Many officers will call in a supervisor when requested (or a supervisor may already be on scene if things got heated). A supervisor might be more knowledgeable about First Amendment issues and could override the officer’s order (“Actually, if he’s not interfering, he’s fine”). Even if not, you’ve shown you’re trying to resolve it through proper channels, not just being obstinate.
• Document your non-consent: If you do end up complying with an order to stop recording or to hand over something, verbalize that you do not consent. E.g., if an officer says “Give me that camera as evidence” and you feel you can’t stop them, you can say, “I’m handing over my camera under protest. I do not consent to any search of its contents.” This puts on record that it’s a seizure, not a voluntary surrender, which could be important later under the Fourth Amendment.
• Reasonable compliance vs. passive resistance: There is a concept of passive resistance (like not helping an officer violate your rights but not attacking them). In an audit, passive resistance might be simply remaining silent or not aiding an unlawful order (e.g., an officer grabs your camera to stop your recording; you don’t fight back, but you didn’t voluntarily hand it over either). This is generally fine; just don’t cross into active resistance. If they say “turn it off” and you do nothing (neither turning it off nor continuing any provocative action), you’re being passively non-compliant. They may get frustrated and turn it off themselves or arrest you. But note, some jurisdictions might consider any non-compliance as obstruction if they stretch it. Again, up to you how far to push. If your goal is avoiding arrest, it’s usually better to voice your objection but then comply enough to not get arrested for that specific thing.
• Silent refusal: If you are doing a silent audit (where you do not speak at all to officers), refusing orders silently is tricky. For example, if an officer says “You need to leave,” and you just stand there silently filming, the officer may interpret that as defiance and escalate immediately. In silent mode, you rely purely on being obviously non-threatening and legally allowed. Some auditors do this and sometimes officers just fume and eventually leave if they aren’t sure what to do with a silent person who’s not breaking a law. But it can also annoy officers more. If you choose the silent route, be aware that it might hasten an arrest since the officer can’t get feedback from you. One compromise: you can stay silent to questions but still comply with clear orders (e.g., if they physically move toward you in a herding manner or point “go over there,” you move, without speaking). You’ve remained silent, but you didn’t fight the order. This way you still haven’t incriminated or engaged in conversation, but also didn’t invite a physical confrontation. It’s a delicate dance.

Remember, during any interaction: keep the camera rolling (unless truly forced to shut it off or risk immediate arrest). Ideally, you film the entire interaction from start to finish. This continuous record is your evidence of what was said and done. The ACLU recommends documenting details like officer names, badge numbers, what happened, etc.. In practice, your video will capture most of it, but it doesn’t hurt to occasionally narrate details for the record: “It’s 3pm, I’m standing in the lobby filming quietly, now an officer (badge #123) has approached me and ordered me to stop. I’ve asked for a supervisor.” These narrations, if done calmly, reinforce that you’re composed and thinking about the record. They also can be valuable later to refresh your memory.

Use the “Silent Audit” Tactic Wisely

Some auditors opt for the “silent audit”, meaning they do not speak at all during encounters with officers or officials (except perhaps minimal words like identifying that they’re taking the Fifth). The idea is to exercise the right to remain silent fully and not give authorities any information. This tactic can be effective in not incriminating oneself and in making the officers work harder (they have to come up with reasons without your admissions). But silence can also frustrate police and escalate tension if they’re not used to it. Here’s how to do it correctly:

• Make your intention clear (non-verbally or with a brief statement). One approach: carry a pre-printed rights card or note. For example, some people have a small card that says: “I am remaining silent. I refuse to consent to any search. I want to speak to a lawyer.” If an officer starts questioning you, you can simply hand them the card. This clearly communicates your position without you speaking. Alternatively, you might verbally state once, “I am invoking my right to remain silent”, and then say nothing further. That puts them on notice. After that, zip it.
• Expect confusion or irritation. Many officers are not used to someone literally standing mute. They may think you’re deaf or in shock. They might wave a hand in front of your camera, snap fingers, etc. Some might get angry: “Oh, you one of those guys who won’t talk?” Be prepared for that mentally so you don’t get rattled and blurt something out. Steady yourself , silence can be powerful but also awkward. If you’ve never done it, practice not responding even when prompted, to build that discipline.
• Use gestures if needed for safety. If an officer gives a lawful command (like “Move back” or “Put your hands up”), even if you’re silent, comply physically. You can nod to acknowledge. For example, if they ask “Do you understand?” you can simply nod rather than speak. If they ask for ID in a state where you must provide it, you can silently hand it over (though note: in many states you’re not required to hand over physical ID, just verbally identify , but if you’re staying silent, you might choose to provide the ID document instead of speaking your name). If you choose not to give ID and silence, you likely will be arrested in a stop-and-ID state; in a no-ID state, they can’t lawfully require it, but they might arrest you out of frustration and later face a lawsuit. That’s a personal judgment call.
• Keep rolling and calmly take in what they say. Your silence will often lead officers to fill the void by talking more , which can actually be great for your camera. They might reveal their ignorance of the law or issue unlawful threats (“If you don’t answer me, I’ll just arrest you for X”). All that gets recorded as evidence for you. You maintain a neutral or inquisitive expression (no smirking, that could be seen as taunting) and just let them talk. Do not laugh, even if what they say is ridiculous , that could be seen as provoking.
• Be prepared to be detained longer. Because you’re not helping them resolve the situation, they might detain you longer to try to identify you or decide what to do. If you’re fine with that, cool. Just know a silent audit often prolongs the encounter. Officers might call in backup or attempt other tactics (like trying to talk to your friend if you have one with you who isn’t silent).
• Know the law about silence: Under the Fifth Amendment, you have the right not to speak. However, there are a few narrow exceptions: e.g., during a Terry stop in some states, you may have to give your name (as we covered). Also, if you choose silence and are arrested and prosecuted, in court the prosecution generally cannot use your silence against you as evidence of guilt. (They can’t say “He didn’t answer the officer, so he must have known he was wrong.”) One caution: if you spontaneously break silence to answer some things but not others, those selective answers could open you up , consistency is key. Truly staying silent means staying silent through the whole interaction, except necessary compliance or very minimal assertions of rights.

The silent audit is a high-commitment strategy. It can yield very compelling footage , an auditor silently filming while an officer berates or threatens them looks bad for the officer. It also absolutely ensures you don’t accidentally incriminate yourself or talk yourself into a charge (many charges like obstruction can come from arguing). But silence can also annoy an officer into an arrest just out of spite or confusion. If your primary goal is to avoid arrest at all costs, a soft-spoken cooperative tone (while still refusing unlawful requests) might work better than total silence. On the other hand, if your goal is to press a constitutional stand, silence is a strong form of protest. Choose based on your style and the situation.

Document Everything (From Start to Finish)

A golden rule of auditing: record and document the entire interaction from the moment you arrive until you leave. Do not shut off your camera just because an officer walked away, because they might come back a minute later. You want an unbroken record. Here are documentation best practices:

• Start recording before you even engage. Ideally, turn on your camera as you approach the audit location (or even in your car right before walking up). That way you capture the context , e.g., “It’s 2:00pm, I’m walking into X building.” If someone later claims you did something before you started recording, having the earliest possible footage can disprove that. Also, in case an encounter turns south quickly, you might not have time to fumble with the camera , so have it rolling in advance.
• Narrate important details (without over-talking). You don’t need to talk constantly (especially if silent auditing), but consider narrating key observations: date, time, place, who is present. For instance, quietly stating “I’m at the public library on Main St. The time is 3:45pm” at the start of your video can be useful context. If officers approach, you might say into the camera, “Two officers are now approaching me”. After getting a name/badge, you can say “Officer Smith (badge 123) has arrived”. These notes help anyone viewing the video later (including a jury, maybe) understand what’s happening. It also helps you remember later, as adrenaline can fuzz your memory.
• Keep the camera angled to capture as much as possible. If you’re holding it, try not to point it down or away during confrontation; keep subjects in frame. If chest-mounted, maybe angle your body to keep the action in view. If multiple cameras, even better , one can capture a wide shot while another gets close-ups. If alone, a wide shot is safer to show context (like distances, whether you were behind a line, etc.), but make sure you capture faces/badges when you can for identification.
• If anything notable happens, speak it out loud. Example: “The officer just said he will arrest me if I don’t leave, citing trespass.” Or “Security guard just took a swing at my camera”. Verbalizing it ensures it’s on the audio track clearly (sometimes physical action might be off-frame; your verbal note fills the gap: “He just knocked the phone out of my hand”). It also shows you were attentive. Many auditors narrate like this especially if they think police might try to later lie , saying it as it happens can counter any false narrative.
• Don’t stop recording until well clear of the scene. Even after a police interaction ends peacefully, keep recording while you exit and get to a safe distance. Why? There have been cases where as soon as the person thinks it’s over and turns off the camera, something else happens (an officer says one more snide remark, or follows you, or a bystander confronts you). Also, you might capture aftermath like an officer telling staff “it’s okay, they have the right” , which is a positive result to have on tape. If you truly feel the audit is over, you can step outside or away and then sign off on your video: “Audit completed, no further contact, it’s now 4:00pm and I’m leaving.” Then turn it off. Closing words help mark the end in case of editing later.
• Backup footage ASAP: If you’re not live-streaming, as soon as you can after the audit (preferably immediately in your car or home), back up your video. Upload it to cloud storage, or copy to a laptop or another memory card. The risk of losing evidence is real , if police seized your camera and you get it back empty, you’d rely on backup. Or if your camera malfunctioned, having a second angle or audio recorder is helpful. The ACLU guide suggests writing everything down if you weren’t able to record. In our context, we aim to record everything, but still, jotting a quick memo of key moments while it’s fresh can’t hurt , it might help your lawyer or your narration when you later edit the video for upload.
• Use timestamps or markers in long audits. If your audit spans hours, it can be useful to note the time when things happened (some cameras display time; if not, mention it verbally at intervals). This can help later if you need to pinpoint when exactly a certain statement was made or when you left , crucial for things like proving you complied before closing time etc.
• Preserve raw footage. If you plan to upload to YouTube or elsewhere, always keep the original unedited footage on file. If a legal case arises, the unedited video is evidence. Edited montages for YouTube entertainment are fine for public, but any litigation will require the raw video to show context. So don’t overwrite your SD card without saving the original to a safe place.

Documenting thoroughly not only strengthens any potential legal case, it also furthers the educational goal of audits. A well-documented audit can be shown to police departments (for training) or the public to say “Here’s exactly what happened, no funny business.”

Maintain a Reasonable Distance & Avoid Physical Interference

We touched on this in earlier sections, but it’s vital to emphasize: never give authorities a valid reason to claim you were physically interfering or causing an unsafe situation. Many auditors have been arrested under broad charges like “obstruction” or “interference with duties” primarily because officers perceived them as too close or a distraction. While sometimes those charges are bogus, distance is one area where the law is somewhat on the officer’s side , police can set perimeter for safety, and if you cross it, they may have grounds to arrest.

• What is a reasonable distance? There’s no fixed rule (except where a state tried, like Arizona’s 8-foot rule which got struck down). Generally, if you’re filming police performing duties (like an arrest, traffic stop, etc.), try to stay far enough not to impede or make them feel encircled. Often 10 feet is cited by officers (some departments instruct their officers that 10 feet is a baseline). But 10 feet might be too close for some contexts (like a volatile arrest scene with multiple suspects). Use common sense: If an officer keeps glancing at you instead of the suspect, you might be too close. Back off a bit more until they seem to ignore you. If they have to shout over to tell you to move, you probably were borderline distance. Comply with such directives as we discussed. The DOJ letter explicitly noted that recording from a safe distance without obstructive intent is not interference. Many departments allow bystanders as long as they stay behind the officers or a certain line.
• Don’t physically insert yourself into situations. This should go without saying, but do not try to “auditorially” intervene in police work. For example, if police are talking to someone and you think they’re violating rights, do not come between them or demand the police stop , that’s the other person’s issue, you’re there to film. Yelling things like “Don’t talk, you have the right to remain silent!” might be well-intentioned to help the citizen, but it could be construed as interfering (you’re interrupting the officer’s investigation). It might also escalate things for that person. It’s usually better to just quietly record. If that person later needs the footage, that’s how you help.
• Avoid any physical contact or obstruction. Keep your distance from doors, pathways, vehicles, etc. If you’re in a lobby filming and a police officer or employee needs to walk by with paperwork or a prisoner, step aside. Don’t block the doorway inadvertently. If an officer says “excuse me, coming through,” absolutely oblige. This shows you are not trying to impede anything. Also, obviously, do not touch any officer or their equipment. Even tapping an officer to get their attention is a no-no; they might treat it as assault. If you need to get an officer’s name and they’re walking away, follow verbally at a respectful distance but don’t grab their arm or block their path.
• Follow any crime scene or accident scene tape or instructions. If police put up tape and tell everyone to stay back behind it, do so. If they explicitly establish a perimeter (sometimes they’ll say “Everyone, get back behind that pole”), then make sure you’re behind that landmark. If you think they’re pushing you unreasonably far (like 3 blocks away) while letting others (like news media) closer, you can object verbally: “Officer, I’m press as well, I should be allowed the same distance as others.” But careful , at a dynamic scene, they may not differentiate and might arrest you rather than argue. Usually, if mainstream media is present, try to mirror what they do , if they have a press pass and are allowed closer, you might ask the officers to treat you equally, but if they refuse, don’t physically push in. It might become a legal complaint later for press freedom discrimination, but you won’t win that fight on the street.
• Beware of “contempt of cop” traps. Sometimes an officer will say “You’re impeding my investigation” even if you aren’t. They might be fishing for you to argue or resist so they can justify an obstruction charge. The best response is calmly: “Officer, I’m not interfering. I’m staying at a safe distance and not saying anything. I have a right to observe.” You stating that in the moment is both for them and for your camera. If they still arrest you, that statement can be valuable in court. But often, stating it might make them think twice: if they have no concrete example of how you interfered, they might back off, knowing you know the nuance.
• If approached by officers (when you’re filming them), give them space to do so. For instance, you’re 20 feet away filming a traffic stop, and an officer finishes with the driver and then starts walking toward you. Don’t run, but also don’t run up to meet them. Stay put or take a step back to maintain that gap as they approach. Show with your body language you’re not trying to charge at them; you’re remaining an observer. If they come right up to you, remain still , let them close the gap if they choose, but that’s on them.

In essence, show that you take safety and non-interference seriously. If any bystander or officer later is asked, “Was that person interfering?”, hopefully they’d say “No, they were just standing back and filming.” Notably, the ACLU advises that as long as you do not stand so close as to obstruct or hinder movements, you have the right to observe and record. This is exactly what you should aim for.

By following these best practices during the audit, you maximize your chances of avoiding arrest and completing your objective. You’ll come across as a responsible, constitutional observer rather than someone looking for trouble. However, even with perfect behavior, you could still encounter unlawful demands or arrests , some officers or officials just don’t know or care about the law. That leads to the next sections: What to do if things go wrong, and the aftermath of an audit, including arrests and legal recourse. But first, in Section VI, we will detail specific pitfalls to avoid , essentially a summary of “Don’t do these things” that often trip up auditors.

What to Avoid

Equally important to knowing what to do during an audit is knowing what not to do. This section highlights behaviors and choices that can increase your risk of arrest or undermine your legal position. Think of it as the “red flag list.” Avoiding these will help ensure that if trouble arises, it’s due to officials overstepping, not because you actually crossed a legal line. Here are key things to avoid:

1. Provocative or Abusive Language

While it’s true that you have a First Amendment right to criticize or even harshly insult police officers or public officials, doing so during an audit is generally counter-productive. Using provocative language , for example, cursing out officers, yelling insults, using slurs , can escalate the situation needlessly. It might feel satisfying in the moment to vent frustration, but it shifts the focus from the official’s conduct to yours. Officers might not legally arrest you just for words (unless they can claim “disturbing the peace”), but it certainly won’t make them cut you any breaks. In fact, you could inadvertently trigger a “discon” (disorderly conduct) charge if your profanity is loud or in a context that someone could consider a public disturbance.

Avoid: Screaming “F— the police!” at a calm scene, or calling an officer a string of obscenities. While courts have often overturned arrests based solely on profanity (noting that police must tolerate a certain amount of verbal abuse), you don’t want to be the test case if you can help it. Moreover, such language can alienate bystanders or jurors; it paints you as looking for a fight, not as a principled auditor.

Better approach: If you feel the need to express disapproval, do it firmly but calmly. For instance, saying “Officer, your behavior is unacceptable and unprofessional” sends a clear message without vulgarity. That kind of criticism is protected and also more likely to make the officer reflect (even if only later) rather than just get angry. Keep your tone measured. Remember, an audit is often about winning in the court of public opinion too , if your video shows you calmly enduring while an officer rants or if you politely call them out on wrongdoing, viewers will side with you. If you’re both trading verbal punches, it muddies the waters.

Also be mindful of “fighting words.” True “fighting words” (direct personal threats or epithets likely to provoke immediate violence) are not protected speech. For example, threatening “I’ll kick your a–” to an officer is obviously a crime (threatening an officer). Even saying something like “You’re a [vile insult] , I hope someone kills you” could potentially result in charges (at minimum, it’s going to ensure the officer finds something to arrest you for). Don’t go there. Keep it civil, or if you can’t, at least not violent or extremely personal.

2. Physical Obstruction or Trespass

We’ve covered maintaining distance, but it bears repeating as something to absolutely avoid: never physically obstruct officers or staff from doing their jobs. This means:

• Don’t stand in doorways, driveways, or pathways where you impede movement. For example, if you’re auditing a post office, don’t park yourself in front of the service counter blocking customers. Stand off to the side. If filming a police station entrance, don’t block the gate or sidewalk so officers can’t walk past.
• Don’t physically interfere with an arrest or scene. That includes not touching an officer, not getting between an officer and suspect, not shining a light in an officer’s eyes, etc. It’s fine to record the police, but the moment you physically insert yourself, you’ve crossed into interference and possibly risk an obstruction charge or worse. The DOJ specifically advised that officers can act if someone’s truly interfering , so just don’t give them that ammunition.
• Respect posted boundaries: If you see a sign “Employees Only” or “No Admittance,” do not go past it. Even if unlocked, that’s trespassing. For instance, some auditors have gotten in trouble by walking through an unlocked door into a back office “just to see.” That will almost always get you arrested or at least thrown out. Public forums end where the public authorization ends.
• Avoid loitering in a way that could be misconstrued. Some states’ loitering laws (like in Delaware or Florida) tie loitering to being asked for ID. You don’t want to give an officer any chance to claim you were “prowling” or casing a place. If you’ve been somewhere for a while filming and decide you have enough, don’t linger with no purpose , wrap up and leave. If an officer comes and you’ve been hanging around a closed facility or after business hours, they might have more reason to suspect you of something.

Essentially, keep your presence passive (just observing) rather than active (doing something that affects others physically). If an officer or staff member says “Excuse me, I need to get by” or “You can’t be back here,” listen to them if it’s a reasonable request. If you inadvertently stepped somewhere off-limits, apologize and step back immediately , that defuses the trespass aspect.

3. Touching Property That Isn’t Yours

During audits, you might be tempted to, say, pick up a flyer on a desk to read it, or test if a door is open, or handle some equipment on display. Be very careful with touching anything that isn’t clearly meant for public handling:

• Don’t rummage through paperwork or grab documents off counters that aren’t obviously meant as public handouts. For example, if in a city hall and a desk has papers, unless it’s a “please take one” brochure, don’t start flipping through them. An employee could accuse you of attempted theft of documents or messing with official files. Instead, ask, “May I see that memo?” and let them hand it if they choose.
• Don’t open closed doors or go behind counters. It sounds obvious, but some auditors get curious or want to test access. If a door says “Authorized Personnel,” pushing it open is trespass even if unlocked. Even a door that’s ajar , if you know it’s not public (like one that likely leads to offices), don’t peek in or slide your camera through the crack. That’s a huge red line.
• Don’t touch police or security equipment. If you’re outside a federal building and there’s a security vehicle or camera, obviously don’t tamper. Even leaning your camera on a police car (to steady it) could be spun as tampering with a vehicle. Keep a hands-off policy.
• Avoid touching other people’s personal property. If a random citizen gets uncomfortable and tries to block your camera with their hand or something, do not smack it away; step back instead. If you touch them or their stuff, you could catch an assault or harassment charge. Let them be the aggressor if anything , you stay passive.

One scenario to watch: Sometimes in public lobbies there might be publicly available forms or complaint logs. Those are meant for public use, so it’s fine to pick up a complaint form or sign a visitor log (if required). Just differentiate that from touching things not clearly meant for you. When in doubt, ask. It shows courtesy and blunts any later claim “he was snooping around.”

4. Filming in Truly Private or Restricted Zones

This ties in with trespass, but beyond physically entering, even pointing your camera into private or restricted areas can cause issues.

• No covert filming in private areas: If you’re in a public hallway and you see through a door’s window into an office where someone’s confidential papers are on the desk, it’s wise not to zoom in on those. You might inadvertently record private info (like citizens’ SSNs on forms) which isn’t illegal per se if visible, but can lead to separate problems or just bad optics. Focus on what’s relevant: the interaction, the officials, the layout , not prying into personal data.
• Courthouse/Courtroom filming: As discussed, do not film in a courtroom or judge’s chambers or even many courthouse lobbies. Many have explicit bans. If you inadvertently do and are confronted, immediately cease and apologize , it’s one area where the law is not on your side. They can confiscate devices in court areas or hold you in contempt.
• Don’t bypass security measures: If an area is blocked by a turnstile, keycard, or “buzz in” system (like many police station interiors or government office suites), that’s clearly not open to the public. Even if someone tailgates out and the door opens, resist the temptation to dart in. That will be considered an unauthorized entry.
• HIPAA-sensitive areas: If auditing something like a hospital or health department, remember HIPAA (health privacy law) binds the workers, not you, but be mindful not to intentionally film medical records or patients in distress. You could be asked to leave under hospital policy for privacy. It’s a grey area legally (since you’re not a covered entity under HIPAA), but practically, filming in areas where people expect medical privacy (like inside a clinic waiting room) will cause confrontation. If you audit a health facility, do it in public/outdoor areas or general lobbies, and avoid patient care areas.
• Military/secure facilities photography: We said filming from outside bases is legal, but one exception: some sensitive government installations have specific federal restrictions (like nuclear facilities, NSA buildings, etc.). If you audit near one, research beforehand if any law prohibits photographing that site. There’s an old federal law (18 USC 795) about photographing defense installations, but it’s rarely enforced and likely unconstitutional as applied to public vantage , still, be aware. If MPs tell you it’s illegal to film X, don’t just take their word , ask for the statute. But if they seem serious (and you don’t want to be a martyr for that cause), backing off might be prudent. This is a niche scenario , most typical audit spots aren’t that sensitive.

5. Ignoring State Wiretapping/Eavesdropping Laws

As mentioned earlier, some states have strict wiretapping laws. While recording on-duty police in public is generally protected, running an audio recorder secretly in a non-public conversation can be illegal.

• If you’re in a two-party consent state (e.g., MA, PA, IL (post-2014 still has all-party for private conversations), MD, etc.), do not hide your camera/audio if you’re recording interactions. Massachusetts had a case where secret recording of police was not protected, whereas openly recording was protected. So, if you want to avoid any grey area, make sure your device is visible or even state “I’m recording.” This can shield you from a wiretap charge. Massachusetts’s law, for instance, forbids “secret” audio recording , so many MA auditors openly hold cameras or have signs stating they’re recording. In states like Illinois, the old strict law was struck down and now it’s fine to record police openly; still, if you’re doing something like phone call recording or other audio not in person, know those consent laws.
• Don’t record in expectation-of-privacy settings without consent. For example, don’t hide a recorder in a private meeting with an official unless you know it’s legal in your state. If you’re in a public lobby, expectation of privacy is low , you’re fine. But if an official says “Step into my office” and you go in and secretly record, that could be iffy if your state requires consent. You might ask, “May I record this conversation for accuracy?” If they say no, then you face a choice: not record (or perhaps decline the private meeting and insist on talking in public areas). Or record anyway and risk legal issues if discovered. Better to avoid that situation by keeping interactions in public areas.
• Drone or telephoto recording of private activities , not exactly wiretapping, but some states have privacy laws about using long lenses or drones to surveil someone where they have expectation of privacy (like inside their home). As an auditor, you usually wouldn’t do that (you’re focusing on public officials, presumably on duty). Just be careful not to inadvertently zoom into someone’s house from a public street , that can cross privacy lines and even be a state law violation (like “peeping Tom” statutes). Focus your lens on what’s relevant to government accountability, not private citizens unrelated to your audit.

6. Combining Audits with Open Carry (Firearms) , Extreme Caution

Some individuals choose to exercise Second Amendment rights while doing First Amendment audits , for instance, openly carrying a firearm during a police audit. The idea is to assert multiple rights at once. This is high-risk and not recommended unless you are extremely knowledgeable about gun laws and prepared for heavy police response.

Risks of open carry audits:

• Police will treat you as a potential lethal threat first, and a rights auditor second. Many auditors who tried this have been met with drawn guns and felony stops. Even if open carry is legal in your state, an auditor with a camera and a rifle (for example) is going to alarm both police and public. You may find yourself proned out on the ground, disarmed, possibly charged with “disturbing the peace” or “going armed to the terror of the public” (an old common law concept in some places) or if near a school or public building, other specific violations.
• Some states prohibit firearms in certain locations you might audit (post offices , federal law bans guns in postal property, for instance; many city halls or public meetings ban weapons). If you open carry into a post office for an audit, you’re committing a federal crime (39 C.F.R. says no firearms except for official purposes). So absolutely know all overlapping rules if you even consider this.
• Optics: Combining guns and cameras makes many members of the public uneasy. It can shift the narrative against you. Instead of “citizen stands up for rights,” headlines become “armed man causes panic while filming police.” If your goal is public education, a firearm often detracts from that.

If you insist on open carrying during an audit:

• Do it only where it’s unquestionably legal, and probably notify police ahead of time to avoid tragic misunderstandings. (Though notifying defeats the spontaneity of an audit; hence why it’s generally counter to auditing goals.)
• Have your camera clearly visible and maybe a sign that says “I am not a threat, I am exercising legal open carry” , something to hopefully prevent jumpy responses. Even then, expect guns drawn on you by police at least initially.
• Comply instantly with all commands regarding the firearm. If they say hands up, do it. Don’t argue gun rights in the moment; you can fight that later. Movements near your weapon could get you shot.
• Be aware that many states have “brandishing” or “disturbing the peace” statutes. If someone feels threatened by your manner of carry, you could be accused of brandishing. For example, walking around a police parking lot with an AR-15 sling might prompt someone to say they felt menaced. Even if you’re within your right, you may get detained to verify you’re not about to commit a crime.

In short, the best practice is to NOT mix weapons with First Amendment audits unless your audit is specifically about Second Amendment issues and you’re prepared for the consequences.

One alternative: Some auditors carry pepper spray or a taser for personal protection (which is usually legal to carry) but that’s different from a firearm in terms of police reaction. Still, any visible weapon ups the tension. Weigh if it’s worth it.

7. Overreacting to Provocation or Losing Your Temper

Audits can be emotionally charged. Maybe a cop says something derogatory, or a passerby calls you names. It’s crucial not to lose your cool. If you get angry and start shouting or, worse, get physical, you’ll almost certainly face arrest and lose the moral high ground.

Avoid reacting to bait. Some officers might test you by being dismissive or issuing minor threats (“Maybe I’ll just take that camera”). That’s often a tactic to see if you’ll lash out. If you stay calm or even politely ask for a supervisor, it deflates their strategy.

Also, if a member of the public confronts you harshly (“Stop filming me, jerk!”), do not escalate. You might explain calmly you’re in public and have the right, or just disengage and focus elsewhere. If they get handsy, still don’t strike back; step away and film it. Let them be the aggressor , you capture it as evidence. If you hit them, you risk charges (and frankly it complicates your story of being a peaceful rights exerciser).

In summary, the things to avoid boil down to: don’t break the law while asserting your rights. Keep your conduct clean. That way, if an arrest happens, it’s clearly an unjustified one and you have the best chance of prevailing in the aftermath.

Speaking of which, we now move on to what happens after the audit, including what to do if you are arrested and how to seek recourse. That final phase is just as important to achieving accountability and change.

After the Audit

The audit doesn’t end when you stop recording. What happens after , especially if things went wrong , is critical. In this section, we cover steps to take after an audit, including how to handle an arrest (during and after release), how to preserve evidence, and what legal and advocacy channels to pursue for redress. We’ll also discuss the strategic choices like whether to accept an immediate release or push for a full arrest to make a point, and the value of support networks like the ACLU. The goal here is to ensure that if your rights were violated, you follow through in a way that holds authorities accountable and protects your interests.

1. Handling Arrest Situations

If you are arrested during an audit, it’s obviously a stressful scenario. But remember much of your prep was for this possibility. Here’s what to do:

• Stay calm and comply with physical commands. The moment they say “You’re under arrest” or move to cuff you, do not resist. Even if you believe the arrest is wrongful, physically resisting will add additional charges (resisting arrest, assault, etc.) that muddy the waters. The ACLU advises not to resist and to keep hands visible. You’ve already recorded enough hopefully to challenge it later, so don’t make the scene worse now.
• State that you do not consent to any searches. If they start searching your person or bag, you can say calmly, “I do not consent to a search.” They may still search (especially if they claim it’s search incident to arrest), but it’s good to have that on record. They might ask for the passcode to your phone , you have the right to refuse. Typically, do not give it; let your lawyer handle any fights over phone data.
• Invoke your right to remain silent and right to an attorney, then stay quiet. As soon as you’re being cuffed or while being read Miranda rights (if they do), say “I am going to remain silent. I want to speak to a lawyer.” After that, say nothing substantive. Don’t get into debates with them in the car or at the station. Anything you say can be used against you. So zip it about the incident. You can answer basic booking questions (name, address) or you might have given ID already, but beyond that, no talk. Officers might try small talk or say “it’ll go easier if you just explain…” , don’t fall for it. They might also say “Tell us who you are working for” , again, you have no obligation to talk. You already likely gave ID; you don’t need to justify your audit motive without a lawyer present.
• Consider refusing “off-the-record” offers of release that undermine your claims. Sometimes, especially in cases of questionable arrest, officers might detain you, realize their mistake or want to avoid paperwork, and then say something like, “Look, we’ll let you go now if you just agree to drop it or if you delete the footage,” etc. Do not agree to delete anything , that’s evidence. And you’re never obligated to waive your rights or potential claims in the moment. However, they might legitimately decide to release you without charges (like a catch-and-release). If they do without coercing you into something, fine. But if there’s a hint of quid pro quo (“we’ll let you out if you promise not to sue or not to come back”), that’s not a binding promise anyway and could be part of your later complaint. Your stance can be, “I would like to be released. I will not discuss any further actions without legal counsel.”
• Refusing “early release” to strengthen your case: This is a tactic some auditors have used , essentially not bailing out immediately or not accepting a quick release if offered, in order to formalize the wrongful arrest. For example, if police arrest you then say “We’ll just give you a ticket and let you out right now,” some activists decline to sign any ticket or accept release until fully processed, on the theory that a night in jail and a formal charge strengthen a civil case (shows you were significantly deprived of liberty). Also, sometimes if you bail out immediately and charges are never filed, there’s less documentation. By being booked and arraigned, you ensure a paper trail. However, this is a personal decision: staying in jail longer is not something everyone can handle or wants. You have to weigh the benefit. If they drop charges and release you in an hour, you still have a case potentially (detention and seizure of property are actionable). But some think a full arrest/detention makes the case clearer. If you choose to not bail, make sure you or someone informs an attorney so they can perhaps expedite your release the next day in court.
• Contact an attorney ASAP. As soon as you can make calls (after booking typically), call a lawyer or a legal aid organization. If you have one in mind (like maybe you contacted one before the audit or have ACLU’s number), call them. If not, call a trusted friend or family and tell them to start contacting lawyers for you. Mention if you’re a member of any group like the National Lawyers Guild (they have hotlines sometimes). Do not make detailed statements about the incident on the jail phone beyond saying you need a lawyer , assume those calls are recorded.
• Document your arrest experience as soon as possible after release. Once you’re out, write down everything: time of arrest, who said what, any badge numbers, conditions in jail, if they took your camera and if footage is still there, etc. This could be evidence of damages or mistreatment (e.g., if they kept you in a cell without water for 12 hours, note that; or if an officer made a telling comment like “Next time, don’t film us,” that’s golden). Also note any injuries if force was used (even tight handcuffs causing pain , photograph any wrist marks).

2. Preserving and Publishing Evidence

Whether or not an arrest occurred, after any contentious audit you should swiftly secure your evidence:

• Back up all footage , Make multiple copies. Upload it to cloud storage (Google Drive, Dropbox, etc.) in original format. Save to an external hard drive. If police took your device and you happen to have the footage saved to the cloud, you’re ahead. If they return your device, copy everything off immediately in case something happens to it.
• Do not edit the original , keep it intact. You can make copies to edit for YouTube if you want to blur faces or cut length, but archive the raw video safely.
• Preserve metadata , If possible, preserve the video’s metadata (date/time stamps). Don’t convert formats in a way that resets that info. You might later need to prove timing or authenticity; the original file with metadata can help.
• Gather additional evidence , Did any bystander film the incident? If you noticed onlookers, maybe they posted on social media. Sometimes other angles show things you missed. Check YouTube or Facebook for mentions of the location/day. Also consider FOIA-ing public CCTV footage (e.g., if it was outside a government building, maybe their security cams caught the interaction). And definitely, if police cameras (bodycam or dashcam) were likely recording, note to have your lawyer request those via discovery or FOIA. They sometimes vanish if not promptly requested.
• Medical check , If you were roughed up, seek medical attention and get records. Even minor injuries, have them documented (both for your health and for evidence in a lawsuit about excessive force, etc.). Photographs of bruises, etc., should be taken over subsequent days as bruising can take time to show fully.
• Create a written account , Write a detailed narrative of the entire audit while fresh in your mind. Include quotes, actions, timings. This will help your attorney and you might use it in complaints. It’s basically your affidavit of what happened.
• Secure any physical evidence , For example, if your camera or phone was damaged by police, keep it as-is; don’t repair it yet. It may serve as evidence (a busted camera showing force). If something was confiscated and returned, note if anything’s missing or altered.
• Witnesses , If any members of the public or friends were there, get their contact info and notes. Maybe an employee who disagreed with the arrest quietly tells you they’ll back you up , get a statement if you can.
• Publishing the footage , Many auditors upload their videos to YouTube or social media fairly quickly. This can provide a layer of protection (public outcry sometimes helps get charges dropped or brings attention). But run it by your lawyer first if you have one already, especially if you were charged. Sometimes lawyers prefer you not post full evidence publicly until after trial. However, in a lot of these cases, going public adds pressure on the agency and can attract legal help. If you do publish, be truthful and avoid extreme claims in your captions/descriptions. The video should speak for itself; don’t undermine your case by editorializing in a way that could be used against you (like calling the cop a “pig” or saying “they violated so many laws” when a lawyer would phrase it more precisely). Keep your commentary factual: e.g., “This is the video of my First Amendment audit at X location on Y date. I was arrested for Z. I maintain I was engaged in lawful activity.”
• Privacy considerations in publishing , It’s wise to blur faces of uninvolved citizens in your video before posting. They didn’t ask to be on YouTube. Legally you may not have to, but ethically and to avoid hostility, it’s often done. As for officers, they are public officials , you can name and show them. In fact, do name them if you have the info (e.g., in the description: “Officer John Smith (Badge 123) of X Police” etc.). That can prompt media follow-ups or just let the department know this officer’s actions are noted publicly.

3. Legal Recourse: Complaints and Lawsuits

Once safe and with evidence secured, you should consider pursuing accountability for any wrongdoing:

• Internal complaints: Nearly every law enforcement agency has a process for filing a complaint against officer misconduct. This could be through Internal Affairs or a civilian review board. File a complaint fairly soon (some have time limits, but sooner is better). In it, stick to the facts: identify the officers, date/time, what they did (e.g., “violated my First Amendment right to record by arresting me for disorderly conduct with no cause,” “used excessive force by slamming my camera to the ground,” etc.). Attach or reference your video. The outcome of internal complaints can vary , sometimes they’re brushed off, but it creates a record. If that officer has a pattern, your complaint adds to it. And sometimes departments do quietly discipline or train officers based on complaints. Don’t expect miracles from an IA complaint, but it’s a step.
• Notify higher-ups: You might also send a letter to the police chief or the head of that agency summarizing the incident and your concerns. Possibly CC the city mayor or council if it’s a local police. Public officials sometimes respond when a formal complaint alone might languish. Keep tone professional, focusing on rights and that you seek assurance this won’t happen to others.
• ACLU or legal aid assistance: Organizations like the ACLU often take interest in clear-cut First Amendment violations. Many big right-to-record cases have ACLU backing. You (or your lawyer) can reach out to them. Even if they don’t formally represent you, they might write a letter to the police department or DOJ about the incident. Also, some states have specific free speech legal defense funds or constitutional rights centers that might help. Since this guide is about educating the public as well, highlight the broader principle in your outreach: e.g., “This case is about the right of citizens to film police , an issue our courts have settled. I don’t want what happened to me to happen to others.”
• 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Lawsuit: This is the big one , a federal civil lawsuit for violation of your rights. Section 1983 allows you to sue state actors (like police officers, in their official or individual capacity) for depriving you of constitutional rights. If your arrest was bogus (no probable cause) or your camera was seized illegally or your First Amendment rights chilled, you likely have grounds for a lawsuit for false arrest, unlawful seizure, First Amendment retaliation, etc.. These lawsuits can seek monetary damages and sometimes injunctive relief (like policy changes). To pursue this, you’ll typically need a lawyer. Many civil rights attorneys will take such cases on contingency if they see clear misconduct, because if you win, the government often has to pay your legal fees as well as damages. Start consulting lawyers who specialize in police misconduct or civil rights. Provide your evidence and arrest records. They’ll assess if you have a strong case. Given the rising awareness of First Amendment audits, some lawyers are familiar with this exact scenario.

• Qualified immunity: Be aware, officers might claim qualified immunity (a legal doctrine shielding officials if the law wasn’t “clearly established”). However, as we outlined, the right to record police is clearly established in most circuits. If you’re in one of those circuits, a lawyer will argue no qualified immunity for violating that right. If you’re unlucky to be in a circuit that hadn’t said it yet, your lawyer can still point to the consensus. For false arrest claims, they’ll look at whether any reasonable officer could have thought the arrest was lawful. Your video will be crucial there.
• Damages: Even if you weren’t hurt, you suffered constitutional harm (loss of liberty, property, emotional distress). If you spent time in jail, had to pay bail, had equipment damaged or seized, these can be quantified. Also punitive damages might be sought if officer’s conduct was egregious. Don’t expect a windfall; some cases settle modestly, others if really bad (like violence) can yield larger sums. But often, the goal is also to force department policy changes or training so this doesn’t repeat.

• Preserve all evidence for lawsuit: Once you have a lawyer or are planning pro se, you (or the lawyer) will send spoliation letters to the department telling them to preserve all evidence (bodycam, radio logs, etc.). By doing that early, you ensure they can’t easily “lose” things without repercussions.
• Push for a jury trial if criminal charges proceed: If you were criminally charged (say for trespass or obstruction) and you plead not guilty, you often have the right to a jury trial (depending on the severity; petty misdemeanors sometimes don’t). Auditors often opt for a jury trial because a jury of peers may see the arrest as wrongful, and prosecutors might drop weak charges rather than go through a trial. Additionally, the discovery process in a criminal case can get you evidence (like officer statements, bodycam video) that also help your civil case. If you can, get a lawyer for the criminal case (sometimes public defender if you qualify). Never plead guilty just to get it over with if you intend to fight for your rights. A guilty plea (even to a lesser charge) can undermine any civil suit because the defense will say “you admitted to wrongdoing.” In contrast, if charges are dropped or you’re acquitted, you stand on firmer ground to claim you were wrongfully arrested.
• Media and public pressure: Don’t underestimate the power of public attention. If you’re comfortable with it, share your story with local news or on social media. Footage of rights violations often goes viral. This can pressure police to change and can also attract attorneys if you haven’t found one. However, coordinate with your lawyer once you have one; sometimes during active litigation they prefer limiting public statements. But early on, a news story about “Man arrested for filming police doing nothing wrong” can embarrass the department and potentially speed up a resolution (like charges dropped or a settlement offer).
• ACLU/journalist involvement: If you were on public property recording and got arrested, sometimes writing to the state ACLU or Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press or similar can result in them sending letters to the police or even joining a case as amicus. Also, they might highlight your case in reports on right-to-record issues, bolstering awareness.
• Stay persistent but patient: Legal processes are slow. Complaints can take months to investigate. Lawsuits take years. It can be frustrating, but stick with it. By seeing it through, you contribute to the body of law that will protect future auditors. Sometimes agencies quietly settle and institute new training (“Don’t arrest people just for filming”), which is a win for the movement.

4. Networking and Support

Facing the aftermath of an arrest or confrontation can be isolating, but remember there’s a community out there:

• Reach out to fellow auditors or rights activists. They can give advice, and some might have been through similar situations and can refer you to attorneys or resources. They also often share each other’s stories online, amplifying the message.
• Legal support organizations: In addition to ACLU, there are groups like National Lawyers Guild (NLG) which sometimes assist those arrested at protests or rights exercises. They often have hotline numbers especially after big protest events; even if your situation is solo, some chapters might advise you.
• Bail funds: If you had to pay bail or bond, some communities have civil rights bail funds that reimburse or help with that cost if your arrest was in service of civil liberties. Worth exploring.
• Thermal Support: Getting arrested or roughed up can be traumatic. Don’t hesitate to seek emotional support or counseling. It’s not weakness , stress from these events can be significant. Talk to trusted friends or a therapist if you feel lasting anxiety or anger. A clear head will benefit your legal fight and future audits.
• Plan future audits more carefully if returning to the field: If you continue auditing after a bad incident, consider bringing an ally to watch your back. Also, maybe start with a different location to regain confidence. Some auditors revisit the same place after winning a case as a victory lap, but only do that when you’re fully cleared and ideally with media or backup present to deter repeat mischief.

Finally, use what happened as a learning tool. Your experience, though difficult, can educate others , maybe write about it or make a “what I learned” video once legal matters are settled. This ties into the conclusion: how calm, informed auditing can incrementally improve the system.

Conclusion

Conducting First Amendment audits is ultimately about upholding constitutional principles through peaceful, informed action. As we’ve seen, it’s not without peril , auditors can face unlawful arrests, intimidation, and misunderstanding. However, by navigating your rights wisely , with preparation, calm demeanor, and persistence , you can minimize those risks and even turn negative encounters into positive change.

Knowledgeable, calm auditing promotes civic engagement and awareness. When you go out armed with the Constitution (and a camera) instead of anger, you embody the values you’re fighting for. Each successful audit , where you educate an officer or simply record without incident , reinforces that public servants are accountable to the people. Each unlawful arrest that is later challenged in court helps clarify and solidify our rights for the future. Your calm presence can also influence bystanders: they might wonder what you’re doing, ask, and learn that they too have the right to observe their government. Every interaction is an opportunity to spread constitutional literacy.

It’s important to remember that the First Amendment audit movement is evolving. In recent years, many police departments have been trained to expect citizens filming and have adapted. Some now instruct officers to not interfere with photography. Court decisions continue to roll in confirming the right to record. At the same time, new challenges emerge: for example, attempts like Arizona’s 8-foot law (which was struck down as unconstitutional) show that legislative battles may arise to limit recording. Auditors must stay vigilant as laws and policies change. What is true in 2025 may shift by 2026 if a high court weighs in or if a state tries novel restrictions (like drone usage or anti-“harassment” definitions aimed at auditors).

The movement is also facing its own internal challenges , the public perception. While many auditors are respectful, some have taken a more confrontational or sensational approach for social media. This has led to criticism that some audits are more about provocation than education. It’s up to each auditor to decide what legacy they want to contribute. As this guide has emphasized, a professional approach tends to yield more enduring results , both legally and in terms of public support. The future legal challenges may include pushing for a Supreme Court ruling to resolve any circuit splits, and addressing qualified immunity so that officers are held accountable when they do violate clear rights. Auditors, by pressing these issues through courts and advocacy, play a key role in that trajectory.

In conclusion, navigating your rights during First Amendment audits requires a blend of courage and caution. By understanding the legal framework, planning meticulously, exercising restraint and respect, and knowing how to react if things go wrong, you empower yourself to audit effectively while staying out of jail. You become a part of a larger civic effort to ensure that government transparency and constitutional accountability are not just slogans, but everyday reality.

Each time you stand on a sidewalk with a camera and a purpose, you demonstrate the fundamental American principle that the government works for the people, and the people have the right to watch it in action. When done right, First Amendment audits educate officials and onlookers alike, deter public misconduct, and reinforce that our freedoms , of speech, of press, of assembly , are alive and well. As an auditor, you carry on a proud tradition of civil liberties activism. Do so wisely and safely, and you will continue to shine a light where it’s needed, inspiring others to know and exercise their rights.

Stay safe, stay respectful, and keep that camera rolling , in the long arc of history, your efforts contribute to a more open and accountable government for all.

---

Sources:

• United States Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division , Letter re: citizens’ right to record police (2012)
• Electronic Frontier Foundation , “Victory! Another Court Protects the Right to Record Police” (EFF, July 2022)
• Electronic Frontier Foundation , “Fourth Circuit… Right to Livestream… Traffic Stops” (EFF, Feb 2023)
• Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press , State-by-state guides on right to record police
• ACLU of Texas , “Your Right to Film Police” (Know Your Rights guide)
• Monroe Gallery/PDN , “DOJ Warns Police Against Violating Photographers’ Rights” (May 2012)
• First Amendment Audit , Wikipedia entry (accessed 2025)
• Fox News , “Online activists’ ‘First Amendment audits’ , patriotism or provocation?” (Feb 2019)
• Chestnut v. Wallace, 947 F.3d 1085 (8th Cir. 2020) , citing consensus of circuits on recording right
• AP News , “Court strikes down limits on filming of police in Arizona” (Sept 2022)

---

                  First Amendment audit – Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_audit

    Online activists’ ‘First Amendment audits’ — patriotism or provocation? | Fox News

https://www.foxnews.com/us/youtuber-shot-by-synagogue-guard-is-part-of-first-amendment-audit-online-movement-testing-authorities

             Department of Justice Warns Police Against Violating Photographers’ Rights – 2012-05-19 – Press – News

https://monroegallery.com/news/press/department-of-justice-warns-police-against-violating-photographers-rights

         Right to record government officials in public Archives | The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press

https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-sections/right-to-record

     Fourth Circuit: Individuals Have a First Amendment Right to Livestream Their Own Traffic Stops | Electronic Frontier Foundation

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/02/fourth-circuit-individuals-have-first-amendment-right-livestream-their-own-traffic

    Chestnut v. Wallace, No. 18-3472 (8th Cir. 2020) :: Justia

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca8/18-3472/18-3472-2020-01-21.html

     Victory! Another Court Protects the Right to Record Police | Electronic Frontier Foundation

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2022/07/victory-another-court-protects-right-record-police

               Your Right to Film Police | ACLU of Texas | We defend the civil rights and civil liberties of all people in Texas, by working through the legislature, the courts, and in the streets.

https://www.aclutx.org/en/know-your-rights/your-right-film-police

      Stop and Identify States 2025

https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/stop-and-id-states

   Poster 7 – Rules and Regulations Governing Conduct on Postal Service Property

https://about.usps.com/posters/pos7.pdf

 Judge @2:10 “… there are signs that say you cannot film in the …

Judge @2:10 “… there are signs that say you cannot film in the courthouse without permission…”. Question: are those signs lawful and enforceable?
byu/bigtoejam inAmIFreeToGo

  Court strikes down limits on filming of police in Arizona | AP News

https://apnews.com/article/arizona-cant-limit-filming-of-police-a7a7ad0fe5b421d416ec3477d0795707

 Stopped by Police | American Civil Liberties Union

Stopped by Police

 What To Do When Encountering Questions from Law Enforcement

What To Do When Encountering Questions from Law Enforcement