Judge halts Indiana law establishing 25-foot buffer around police amid lawsuits
An Indiana law creating a 25-foot buffer zone between on-duty police and bystanders is on hold after a federal judge ruled Friday that the law is likely unconstitutional because it's too vague to enforce fairly.
Presiding over a lawsuit filed by The Indianapolis Star and other media organizations after the buffer law took effect last year, Judge James Sweeney issued a preliminary injunction Friday that halts enforcement of the law as litigation unfolds. Sweeney found that the plaintiffs are likely to prove the law is "void for vagueness," in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, and would continue to infringe on the freedom of the press without a pause on enforcement.
House bill 1186 , signed into law last year, says a person commits a Class C misdemeanor if they approach within 25 feet of an on-duty officer after being ordered to stop. Along with media organizations, the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana has criticized the law as a First Amendment violation and is suing on behalf of a South Bend man whom police barred from moving closer to a crime scene to record officers.
Sweeney, a judge in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana , wrote in the injunction Friday that the law is likely unconstitutional because it "does not define with any specificity the kind of conduct that would prompt an order to move back." The law also, Sweeney wrote, "contains no standards for law enforcement officers to follow in enforcing the law, leaving it susceptible to arbitrary and discretionary enforcement."
IndyStar and the other plaintiffs argue that standing 25 feet away could prevent journalists and citizens from clearly observing or recording audio of on-duty officers. For journalists, the lawsuit states, that creates a chilling effect through "a choice between committing a crime and forgoing reporting."
The ACLU is appealing a different judge's ruling this January to uphold the law. That judge rejected the ACLU's argument that the 25-foot buffer was a substantial obstacle to a South Bend man's right to record police conduct, saying modern zoom lenses and microphones allow people to record with clarity well beyond that range.
Advocates say the law allows police officers to investigate crime scenes and secure evidence unimpeded by bystanders, while also protecting the privacy of suspects, victims and witnesses.
But the ACLU and other critics worry it grants officers too much discretion to prevent people from recording them in an era where videos of police misconduct have become crucial to accountability.
Email IndyStar Housing, Growth and Development Reporter Jordan Smith at . Follow him on X:
