The bill essentially said that bodycam footage would no longer be considered a "public record."
As a result, it created two pathways for people to see the footage.
The first pathway just lets people view the footage in private and does not release it to the public.
The rule on this is the police get to determine who views the footage privately.
So if you think you were mistreated during a traffic stop and you want to see the footage - privately, with no public release - the police essentially get to determine whether or not that happens.
If they say no, you can appeal to court, but the court can only overrule the police if they feel the police “abused their discretion,” which is a very high bar to clear.
So it’s incredibly difficult to overrule their decision.
The second pathway to seeing the footage is getting it released to the public.
This is a 100% judicial decision. Even if the police call for the public release of the footage - as they now are in the case of Andrew Brown - it doesn’t matter. The court makes the decision.
Notably, there’s no timeframe in the law for the court to decide.
We’ve seen these decisions take days, weeks, or months.
In the case of Andrew Brown, the judge bizarrely ruled that the media did not have standing to request the release of the footage.
There’s nothing in the law about that and there’s clear precedent to the contrary. There are dozens of cases to the contrary.
The judge also ruled that the footage will be released in 30-45 days.
That’s very strange given that even the local sheriff is calling for the immediate release of the footage and said he was “disappointed” by the ruling.
What we’re seeing are the actual consequences of a law that stacks the deck against release of footage, and that’s having immediate impacts on the ground in Elizabeth City.
Everyone recognizes there are interests to balance here, but when the footage isn’t recognized as a public record it means transparency can be treated as an afterthought.
And when transparency gets pushed aside, the public reacts. Suspicion deepens - often with good reason.
Currently, there are several legislative proposals for reforming this law in a way that would allow for a fair and sensible balancing of interests that elevates the concern for transparency. I support those efforts, but I’m also open to new ideas that haven’t been offered yet.
What I’m not open to is doing nothing in the face of a law that obviously isn’t serving the public.
We need a sense of urgency about this and I’m ready to work with anyone who cares about getting this right.
- Jeff
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
"Carolina Journal has learned that GOP redistricting leaders will consider approving a new map designed to elect a 10 Republicans and four Democrats beginning in 2022."
A bill filed in our state legislature this week (SB514) would require that teachers report in writing to a student’s parents if they’ve “exhibited symptoms of gender nonconformity.”
So, the length of their hair? The colors they're wearing?
Read for yourself:
Can you imagine the chaos this would create in high schools across our state if it became law, the constant discussion among students and teachers about which student’s dress and behavior crossed the legal line into the mandatory reporting of "gender nonconformity"?
Imagine the leverage this would give high school bullies, how they could use this law to threaten to out certain students to their teachers.
One of the things that energizes me is talking to people who do early childhood education for a living.
These folks are so passionate and impactful that it just revives me and I’m reminded of what an opportunity we have if we can make early childhood a higher priority.
/thread/
That’s how I felt in Iredell County this weekend when I visited their Partnership for Young Children, which runs their local NC Pre-K and Smart Start.
These folks are just unreservedly good and crucial people and we don’t spend nearly enough time spotlighting their work.
In our discussion, we kept coming back to the role they played during the pandemic.
When we were hit hardest last year, child care workers were one of the groups who carried our country on their backs.
In the state legislature, I serve with many members who are fully convinced the last election was stolen.
But - just as important - I serve with many members who know it *wasn’t* stolen but would be fine using that myth as cover to pass laws to help them win elections.
/thread/
And that’s what’s happening across the country.
A bunch of state legislators who know better are using the myth of the stolen election as cover to give themselves more power by taking it away from you, the voters.
This is about voter turnout. Not voter fraud.
Last week, we talked about the need to renew the Voting Rights Act based on the history of North Carolina’s state legislature abusing its authority to cement the majority party’s power.
We've held 15 town halls and absolutely no one has said:
"Hey Jeff, I want our next senator to keep the filibuster intact even if it means no progress on voting rights, minimum wage, broadband, or climate."
What I *am* hearing is:
"Don't cave to McConnell."
Loud and clear.
I think we all know that McConnell's incentives are to just use the filibuster to try and block everything he can.
If that happens, then no one can call it a tool that produces compromise - it's just a weapon that grinds everything to a halt.
And we can't allow that.
As a specific example, using the filibuster to block voting rights legislation that is needed to protect voters of color from the wave of suppression bills we're seeing is literally Jim Crow behavior.
We'd be foolish to say, "Well, darn, guess that's just the way it goes."