California press protections undermined as violations surged at LA protests

When reporters hit the streets to cover the mass anti-deportation protests that erupted in Los Angeles in June, they expected California law to be on their side.

The state’s press protections are among the strongest in the nation. At least on paper.

On the ground, though, law enforcement routinely ignored them.

Authorities — from federal agents to Los Angeles Police Department officers and LA County sheriff’s deputies — unleashed crowd-control weapons indiscriminately and with shocking force.

Journalists were shoved, clubbed, tear-gassed, shot with projectiles and zip-tied. They were detained, searched and blocked from reporting — even after a federal judge ordered the violations to halt during ongoing litigation.

“LAPD sort of threw the gauntlet down there to say, ‘We don’t care about the law. We are above the law,’” said Los Angeles Press Club press rights chair Adam Rose.

Rose, who has since joined the advocacy staff of Freedom of the Press Foundation, of which the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker is a project, had lobbied for the protections the officers violated.

Those protections were signed into law four years ago, in October 2021, after a wave of protests exposed gaps in the rights afforded to journalists on the ground. At the time, state law allowed reporters to cover disasters, but not protests, once police declared an unlawful assembly.

The new law, California Penal Code 409.7, meant to fix that. It bars police from arresting or interfering with journalists covering protests and largely shields them from dispersal orders.

The new legislation passed with aspirations to protect reporters in the field. But when put to the test this summer, police openly defied it.

Of the 118 press freedom violations documented by the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker in California this summer, all but five were at the hands of law enforcement, as were nearly every one of the 86 assaults.

LA alone accounted for 97 of the 118 violations — nearly half of all press freedom violations reported nationwide so far this year. That included 68 reported assaults, 14 arrests (all ending without charges) and 12 instances of equipment damage.

‘Line of brutality’

“We just met this line of brutality,” said photojournalist Nick Stern. In June, a surgeon removed a piece of shrapnel from his right leg, buried there from a projectile fired during a protest where LA County sheriff’s deputies had been deploying crowd-control munitions.

The Sheriff’s Department told the Tracker in a September email that it was assisting the LAPD at the time, was still reviewing video footage of the incident, and had not yet confirmed the department’s involvement.

When Stern returned to work to cover another protest, an LAPD officer struck his face with a baton, bloodying his press badge as he held it up.

Whether out of a lack of training or blatant disregard for the law, some officers appeared either unaware of journalists’ rights — or unfazed by them. When one journalist told a sergeant that searching a reporter’s bag wasn’t practical or usual, the deputy insisted: “It is in this instance.”

That kind of indifference, in some cases, turned dangerous.

College newspaper reporter Jeremy Cuenca, eager to put his first press badge to use, was struck by a projectile that broke his camera and nearly tore off the tip of his left pinkie.

Héctor Adolfo Quintanar Pérez, wearing a large press badge and carrying two cameras, took a tear gas canister to the knee — fired at close range by an officer. He now needs a cane to walk.

“Everything indicates that freedom of the press doesn’t exist, and they’re proud of it,” Pérez said.

Testing state law in court

Several of the affected journalists, alongside the LA Press Club, have sued the city and its chief of police, the county and its Sheriff’s Department, and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.

The LAPD and DHS did not return requests for comment for this story. But in court filings, the LAPD argued any injuries were incidental to controlling dangerous protests, and DHS claimed its agents only used force to quell violent behavior.

The Sheriff’s Department, in a statement to the Tracker, said it does not condone targeting the press and emphasized its commitment to an “open and transparent relationship with members of the media.”

Across its lawsuits, the LA Press Club accused each agency of unleashing unconstitutional crackdowns against the press. It accused the LAPD of “intentionally assaulting, interfering with, or obstructing” reporters and violating state law; DHS of “unnecessary, indiscriminate, and excessive force on people seeking to exercise their First Amendment rights”; and the Sheriff’s Department of a “brazen refusal to abide by the Constitution and state law.”

“The only accountability comes out of taxpayer pockets when there’s a settlement,” Rose said. “Instead, what we need to see is officers are yanked from duty, they’re fired, they’re not allowed to have overtime, they are put on desk duty, they’re demoted. They need to face serious consequences for violating the laws they’re supposed to enforce.”

The LA Press Club alleges that federal agents showed little concern for who was in their line of fire when they unleashed “an enormous volley” of pepper balls at the journalists covering a June 7 protest. Video shows a TV news crew scrambling for cover.

As the cases played out in federal court, U.S. District Judge Hernán Vera issued a temporary restraining order in July, forbidding LA police from arresting, detaining or using force against journalists performing their jobs.

But within weeks, officers zip-tied and detained four reporters. Multiple journalists were detained in a police “kettle” — a tactic where officers encircle and confine a crowd — including photojournalist Sean Beckner-Carmitchel, who earlier in the night was struck in the ribs by a police baton. He and LA Press Club’s Rose, who was monitoring events via livestream, repeatedly asked to speak with a police supervisor, a requirement under state law, but were ignored.

“They were swinging the batons like baseball bats,” said reporter Melanie Buer, who was shoved into pylons and detained with zip ties for more than an hour.

One police baton split open journalist Tina-Desiree Berg’s finger. Photojournalist Nate Gowdy was thrown to the ground and then, inside a kettle, zip-tied so tightly it left marks on his wrists.

“They didn’t seem to know the law, or they willfully disregarded it in order to intimidate and harass us,” he recounted.

Judge sides with the press

In two separate rulings on Sept. 10 — one against DHS and the other against the city of LA — Judge Vera sided with the LA Press Club, granting journalists a preliminary injunction and declaring in one order: “The First Amendment demands better.”

Vera cited what he called an “avalanche of evidence” that seemed to show federal agents retaliated against members of the press, even those standing far from any protest activity. His order forbids federal agents from using force on journalists without cause. It also bans the use of crowd-control weapons against them unless there’s a clear threat and warning.

DHS later asked the judge, in a court filing reviewed by the Tracker, to stay the injunction while it’s appealed, calling it “intrusive, unworkable, and vague” and warning that it puts both public safety and officers at risk.

“Federal officers faced with dangerous crowds are now left with the impossible choice between risking their safety and risking contempt,” DHS argued.

Vera also granted a preliminary injunction against the city of LA. “It is déjà vu all over again,” he wrote in his decision, referencing the LAPD’s long history of clashes with the press.

The order offers the same protections for journalists as the DHS order. However, it also requires the department to expand officer training, supervise policing at protests and conduct annual policy reviews.

“The LAPD’s heavy-handed efforts to police this summer’s protests violated state law, as well as the federal Constitution,” Vera wrote. “If the rule of law is to have any effect, it must protect Plaintiffs here.”