LOS ANGELES – Sweeping federal lawsuits have been filed against the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) and the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, alleging a systematic pattern of targeting journalists covering recent protests in the city. The legal actions highlight growing concerns among press freedom advocates that the safety of journalists is rapidly eroding across the United States, even in jurisdictions with specific legal protections.
The lawsuits, brought forward by the Los Angeles Press Club, alongside independent news outlets Status Coup and The Southlander, detail more than 50 separate incidents in which journalists reportedly suffered injuries or were otherwise impeded while covering demonstrations. These incidents occurred during the June protests, which included actions against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids and the “No Kings” march, a demonstration against the Trump administration.
Legal Challenges Emerge
The core accusation within the lawsuits is that law enforcement officers deliberately targeted members of the press, despite journalists clearly displaying credentials identifying themselves as media. The plaintiffs argue that this conduct was not isolated but indicative of a systemic approach by the LAPD and LA County Sheriff’s Department to obstruct journalistic coverage of public events.
The legal complaints enumerate a range of injuries sustained by reporters and photographers in the field. These include an incident where a journalist was hit by a tear gas canister, requiring minor surgery to address the injury. Another journalist was struck in the thigh by a ricocheted rubber bullet. Other reported injuries include a pepper ball and a separate projectile hitting a journalist in the head, resulting in a concussion. Perhaps most severe was an injury from shrapnel from a “less lethal” munition, which led to the journalist’s hospitalization and an expected recovery period spanning several months.
Basis in Law: Constitutional Rights and State Statutes
The lawsuits assert that these actions constitute violations of both the U.S. Constitution, which protects freedom of the press, and California’s own press freedom laws. Specifically, the legal challenges cite violations of California Penal Code §409.7 and §13652(b)(6). These statutes were enacted following the widespread protests in the summer of 2020, particularly the Black Lives Matter demonstrations, with the explicit purpose of enhancing protections for reporters covering civil unrest and ensuring their access to public assemblies.
By alleging violations of these specific state laws, the lawsuits underscore the argument that law enforcement failed to adhere to even the heightened legal standards put in place to prevent the very type of incidents being described.
Experts Warn of National Crisis
Experts monitoring the environment for journalists in the United States view these lawsuits and the incidents they detail as symptomatic of a broader, national crisis regarding press safety. Bruce Shapiro, the executive director of the Dart Center for Journalism and Trauma, is cited in connection with these concerns, warning that press safety is diminishing across the country. Shapiro’s perspective highlights that this decline is occurring even in states like California, which boast some of the strongest legal protections for journalists.
The incidents in Los Angeles, therefore, are seen not as an isolated local issue but as part of a disturbing national trend where the ability of journalists to safely report on protests and civil actions is increasingly under threat.
Personal Accounts of Being Targeted
The human impact of these alleged actions is underscored by personal testimonies included in the broader context surrounding the lawsuits. Mexican photojournalist Hèctor Ad Quintanar recounted his experience during the “No Kings” march, where he was shot in the knee. Quintanar stated his belief that he was deliberately targeted by law enforcement, despite visibly displaying his press credentials at the time of the incident.
Such personal accounts lend weight to the systematic targeting claims made in the lawsuits, painting a picture of journalists being deliberately injured or incapacitated while attempting to fulfill their essential role in documenting events of public interest.
Broader Implications for Press Freedom
The outcome of these lawsuits against the LAPD and the LA County Sheriff’s Department could have significant implications for how law enforcement interacts with the press during future protests and public gatherings, not just in California but potentially across the nation. The ability of journalists to cover protests without fear of injury or obstruction is fundamental to a functioning democracy, ensuring the public remains informed about significant social and political events.
These legal challenges aim to hold the departments accountable for the alleged actions and reinforce the legal rights of journalists to report safely from public spaces. As the cases proceed, they will likely continue to draw national attention to the critical issue of press safety and the responsibilities of law enforcement in protecting, rather than impeding, the work of the media covering civil unrest.
