By Randy Krehbiel
Tulsa World
OKLAHOMA CITY — Oklahomans will have to give law officers and other first responders a wider berth as the result of a law that became effective last week.
House Bill 1597, by Rep. John George, R- Newalla, creates a new misdemeanor for bystanders who fail to back off at least 25 feet when ordered to do so by a first responder performing their duty.
The penalty is a fine of up to $500 and one year in jail.
The law is similar to “halo” or “buffer” laws passed by several states in the past few years. In August, a federal appeals court ruled Indiana’s to be impermissibly vague. Courts stopped implementation in Louisiana and Arizona, and a lawsuit against Tennessee’s halo law is pending.
Laws passed more recently in Florida, Georgia and Alabama have been allowed to stand.
The constitutional test seems to be the laws’ specificity. Judges have said the disallowed laws are too broad and too easily subject to abuse.
Oklahoma’s says the person being ordered to move back must show “intent to: 1. Impede or interfere with the ability of the first responder to perform such duty; 2. Threaten the first responder with physical harm; or 3. Harass the first responder.”
Casey Roebuck, a spokeswoman for the Tulsa County Sheriff’s Office, said the new law should be a help for law enforcement.
“Our deputies, and all law enforcement officers, encounter this issue frequently,” Roebuck said in an email. “We believe this new law will help to address it.
“The key element of this law is that a clear warning must first be issued,” she said.
“What this bill does — what I hope it does — is protect the officer and citizens from unnecessary confrontation,” George, a retired Oklahoma City police officer, said earlier this year. “If a first responder is performing their duty and they ask a citizen to stay back 25 feet, then they have to stay back. If they come forward after being warned, it’s a misdemeanor and they can be arrested. But this should cut down on unnecessary confrontations that lead to bad things.”
The bill passed through the Legislature with very little discussion or debate and few negative votes. It gained attention when some law enforcement agencies around the state last week began posting the language of the measure on social media.
Some people saw the new law as an infringement on First Amendment rights and a potential erosion of citizens’ ability to observe law officers and others in the commission of their duty.
The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, which represents news organizations in challenges to the buffer laws, said after the Indiana decision was handed down: “What the Seventh Circuit’s ruling should make clear is, if states want these laws to survive a constitutional challenge, they need to be tethered to real harms, to real obstruction, to real risks to public safety. It’s not enough to just say that sometimes officers don’t want you to be that close — there has to be a bona fide reason for ordering people to move back. Otherwise, these laws are going to continue to face problems under the due process clause.”
Roebuck clarified that people may continue to record video of officers performing their duties, as long as it does not cause any delay, obstruction or interference.
“Importantly, this law does not prohibit individuals from recording law enforcement activity in public,” she said. “Previously, there was no clearly defined distance or safety perimeter established by statute. As a result, individuals could lawfully stand immediately adjacent to a traffic stop or investigation, which divided the officer’s attention and increased risk in already hazardous situations.”
Does Oklahoma’s new 25-foot buffer law strike the right balance between first responder safety and the public’s right to observe and record emergency scenes?
