ACLU Affirms that It Will Not Take Part in Malibu Paparazzi Project

• Says Mayor’s Unofficial Effort to Draft Legal Curbs ‘Cannot Succeed’

BY ANNE SOBLE

The Southern California affiliate of the American Civil Liberties Union affirmed on Tuesday the position that was stated last week in the Malibu Surfside News that the ACLU is not and will not be a participant in Mayor Pamela Conley Ulich’s solo unofficial task force to try to curb paparazzi activity in Malibu.
In a letter printed in entirety on page four, Peter Eliasberg, the SoCal ACLU’s First Amendment specialist says, “While we appreciate Mayor Pamela Conley Ulich’s effort to reach out to the ACLU by asking us to participate in her task force meeting in September, we believe it is an effort that cannot succeed, and therefore we are respectfully declining the invitation.”
Eliasberg says, “The ACLU does not condone reckless or aggressive behavior on the part of paparazzi, and recognizes that the First Amendment is not a shield that allows photographers or other journalists to violate laws that protect public safety. However, a task force to draft a new law to curb paparazzi is unnecessary because generally applicable local and state laws—such as laws that forbid trespass, assault, reckless driving and blocking the sidewalk—already exist to address most of the abuses people cite when they demand new laws to deal with the paparazzi.”
He adds, “These laws are consistent with the First Amendment, and enforcing them does not require the passage of new laws.”
The ACLU counsel notes that “previous efforts to draft new laws to address paparazzi – including efforts involving noted legal scholars—have uniformly resulted in legislation that, if adopted, would have violated the First Amendment in numerous ways.”
Eliasberg says, “The most common problem is that these laws attempt to single out photographers, or photographers who sell their pictures. It is a major red flag to subject persons taking pictures or attempting to make a living by taking pictures—activities that are presumptively protected by the First Amendment—to special burdens.”
He concludes, “It should not matter in the eyes of the law whether the person blocking a celebrity’s entrance or exit to a restaurant, for example, is an overzealous fan or a paid photographer.”
Gordon Smith, the communications director for the local ACLU, contacted The News this week to confirm the accuracy of last week’s article, as well as the contents of an email from the newspaper’s publisher to Conley Ulich that countered her contention that anyone who wants to be apprised of her actions is a participant in those efforts.