ACLU Sues Arkansas State Police Officer Over Alleged Violation of Woman’s Constitutional Rights

Fort Smith, ARK — The Arkansas State Police (ASP) is facing a federal lawsuit after an officer allegedly violated the constitutional rights of a woman at the annual Salt Bowl football game. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Arkansas filed the lawsuit, accusing Sergeant Dakotah Bailey of unlawfully confiscating a cell phone from De’Jarnette Johnson and preventing her from recording police activity during the event.

The incident took place at War Memorial Stadium in Little Rock earlier this year, when Johnson was attempting to document an interaction between law enforcement and individuals in the crowd. According to the lawsuit, which was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, Bailey approached Johnson and forcibly took her phone while she was recording the police. The ACLU argues that this action infringed upon Johnson’s rights under the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments.

Johnson, who was attending the Salt Bowl, stated that her intention in recording the police was to ensure transparency and accountability. “My intention was simply to ensure transparency in the events occurring around me,” she said in a statement. “This case transcends my individual rights — it touches upon our entire community’s ability to monitor and hold accountable those in positions of authority.”

The ACLU contends that the right to record police officers performing their public duties is a fundamental First Amendment right. “Recording police officers in the performance of their public duties is a vital civil liberty protected under the First Amendment,” said Shelby H. Shroff, staff attorney for the ACLU of Arkansas. “Sgt. Bailey’s actions not only suppressed Ms. Johnson’s right to document police activity but also set a dangerous precedent against transparency and accountability in law enforcement.”

The lawsuit also asserts that by seizing Johnson’s phone without legal cause, Sergeant Bailey violated her Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures. According to the ACLU, Bailey’s actions were not only an infringement on Johnson’s ability to record, but also a breach of her right to be free from unlawful searches.

“These actions are a troubling example of overreach by law enforcement and an attempt to suppress lawful, protected activities,” the ACLU said in its press release.

The legal complaint underscores that Johnson’s case is about more than just her individual rights. The ACLU believes it reflects a broader issue concerning the public’s ability to monitor police conduct, particularly in situations where law enforcement officers are engaged in public duties. The organization emphasized the need to safeguard individuals’ rights to record public interactions with police, especially in an era where such recordings have become crucial in holding law enforcement accountable for their actions.

“Our case is not just about one woman’s experience,” said Shroff. “It’s about defending the rights of individuals across Arkansas and the nation to hold government officials accountable for their actions.”

The ACLU is seeking several forms of legal relief, including declaratory judgments affirming that Johnson’s constitutional rights were violated, nominal damages, and reimbursement for legal fees. The organization also expressed its hope that this lawsuit would send a message to law enforcement about the importance of respecting citizens’ rights, especially those exercising their First Amendment freedoms in public spaces.

As of now, neither Sergeant Bailey nor the Arkansas State Police has issued a public statement in response to the lawsuit. The case is still in its early stages, and it remains to be seen how the court will rule on the claims of constitutional violations.

The lawsuit adds to an ongoing national conversation about the right to record police activity and the challenges individuals face when trying to document interactions with law enforcement. Legal experts suggest that the outcome of this case could have broader implications for the rights of citizens to monitor police activity in Arkansas and beyond.

Related Articles

Latest Articles