DistantNews
Support us
🇦🇷 Argentina /Elections & Politics

Civil rights groups back lawsuit challenging US drone restrictions on journalists

From Clarín · () Spanish

Translated from Spanish and summarized by DistantNews. Read the original for the full story.

At a glance

News Named sources In the courts
  • Civil rights groups and a Minnesota photojournalist are challenging an FAA restriction that barred journalists from flying drones near Department of Homeland Security facilities and mobile assets.
  • The rule imposed limits of 914 meters horizontally and 305 meters vertically, with possible civil and criminal penalties for violations.
  • The FAA withdrew the nationwide ban in April, but the plaintiffs want a court ruling on whether the original restriction violated constitutional rights.

Civil liberties groups are backing a lawsuit against a drone restriction that they say made it nearly impossible for journalists to document US immigration operations without risking criminal charges.

The American Civil Liberties Union, its Washington affiliate and the National Press Photographers Association filed a brief in federal court supporting Minnesota photojournalist Rob Levine’s case against the Federal Aviation Administration. The groups accuse the US government of violating freedom of expression by prohibiting journalists from flying drones within 914 meters horizontally and 305 meters vertically of Department of Homeland Security facilities and “mobile assets.”

The FAA restriction forced journalists covering immigration operations to leave their drones on the ground or risk facing criminal charges.

· Scarlet KimThe ACLU attorney criticized the drone restriction in a statement supporting the lawsuit.

The restriction, issued on Jan. 16 during the Trump administration’s immigration operations in Minnesota, also covered vehicles used by immigration agents. The organizations said journalists could not reliably know whether they were near an official vehicle because the vehicles could move and were not always marked. Violations could bring fines, criminal charges or the loss of a drone operator’s license.

unacceptable

· Scarlet KimKim used the word to characterize the FAA measure.

“The FAA restriction forced journalists covering immigration operations to leave their drones on the ground or risk facing criminal charges,” ACLU attorney Scarlet Kim said in a statement, calling the measure “unacceptable” and “unconstitutional.” The groups argue that it violated the First Amendment right to document the actions of public officials.

Levine filed the lawsuit in March with the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The FAA withdrew the nationwide prohibition in April and replaced it with guidance that does not carry the same civil and criminal penalties. The organizations and Levine are nevertheless seeking a judicial determination on whether the original restriction was illegal and violated constitutional rights.

unconstitutional

· Scarlet KimKim described the restriction as violating constitutional protections.
About this summary

Originally published by Clarín in Spanish. Translated, summarized, and contextualized automatically by DistantNews, with a note on how the source frames the story. Not individually reviewed before publishing. How this works.

More Stories

From Our Blog