A federal judge issued a temporary restraining order on Thursday, prohibiting federal law enforcement officers in Portland, Oregon, from arresting or using physical force against journalists or legal observers.
It is alarming that this order was necessary at all. Federal officers are in Portland to put down unrest and to protect government-owned buildings, not to intimidate and detain members of the free press who are not involved in the protests. Unless officers see a journalist or bystander actively committing a crime and/or participating in antagonistic behavior toward law enforcement, there is simply no justification for an arrest.
Federal agents in the area have claimed that any arrests made were unintended and that journalists caught up in the back-and-forth hadn’t identified themselves clearly as media. This is no excuse, according to U.S. District Judge Michael Simon, who pointed out that each member of the press is required to wear “Media” on his or her shirt or jacket, or some other sort of badge that he or she can show to an officer, if necessary.
Moreover, Simon’s order draws an important line. Journalists covering conflict must understand that they might very well be “incidentally exposed to crowd-control devices” and that federal officers cannot and should not be held accountable for unintentional violations of his order. A “willful violation,” however, would be a deliberate violation of “a clearly established constitutional right,” and officers will be held accountable for such behavior.
U.S. Attorney Andrew Warden argued against the order and said that federal officers should not be expected to make quick distinctions while trying to deal with violent rioters. But that is exactly what law enforcement is supposed to do: enforce the law in a way that diffuses the situation and honors the rights of citizens. This isn’t a simple task, but it is an important one, and the men and women who sign up to do it must be held to a standard that fits the job.
