Bill · S. 4696· Senate(119-S-4696)
Right to Record Act of 2026
- Introduced
- 6/8/2026
- Last activity
- 6/8/2026 — Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
- Sponsored by
- Richard Blumenthal
- Cosponsors
- - 1 - 0
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill establishes an express cause of action for violations of the right to record, observe, or peacefully protest law enforcement activities. It states that individuals have the right to engage in these activities in public view, with specific exceptions if a person physically restricts or restrains an officer. Federal law enforcement officers and the United States can be held liable in a civil action for violating these rights. Injured parties may receive actual damages or statutory damages of $25,000 per violation, plus punitive damages up to $100,000 for malicious or reckless violations. The bill also requires federal law enforcement agencies to provide annual training to officers regarding these rights.
Yes· 3 of 17
Does this protect the individual right to speak freely?+9
Provides robust statutory mechanisms to protect expressive activity, observing, and recording of public officials.
Does this protect what people are allowed to say in public life?+9
Strongly reinforces First Amendment protections regarding the right to record, observe, and peacefully protest public officials.
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?+8
Enhances transparency by ensuring citizens can observe and record public actions of law enforcement without interference.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Civil Liability and Financial Redress for Individuals: Under Section 3(b)(1) and Section 3(b)(2), individuals whose rights are violated by federal law enforcement officers can file a civil action in district court and are eligible for the greater of actual damages or statutory damages of $25,000 per violation, along with punitive damages up to $100,000 for malicious or reckless conduct. This holds officials accountable and provides direct financial compensation to people who have been wronged.
-
Waiver of Sovereign Immunity: Section 3(b)(2) waives the sovereign immunity of federal law enforcement agencies for claims brought under the Act. This makes it easier for people to hold the United States liable for the conduct of its officers regardless of agency policies or customs.
-
Explicit Protection Against Retaliation and Harassment: Section 3(b)(3) details specific prohibited violations, such as preventing a person from recording, threatening or intimidating individuals, unlawfully seizing or destroying recording equipment and images, and demanding identification or harassing a person for recording. This protects people from police overreach when they are simply exercising their rights in public view.
-
Attorney's Fees and Costs for Plaintiffs: Under Section 3(d), courts must award reasonable attorney's fees and costs to a prevailing plaintiff. This makes it financially feasible for everyday people to hire legal representation and fight for their rights in court.
-
Mandatory Training for Officers: Section 3(e) requires the head of each federal law enforcement agency to provide annual training to every federal law enforcement officer on how to enforce the law while respecting the right to record, observe, or peacefully protest. This ensures that the people we vote for and fund are actively training officers to respect the constitutional rights of the public.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Physical Restraint Limitation: Under Section 3(c)(1), a person loses the right to record, observe, or peacefully protest law enforcement activities if they physically restrict or restrain an officer taking official actions. While common sense dictates that the public should not interfere physically with police work, this limitation could potentially be used by officers to dispute whether a citizen's proximity constituted physical restriction.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For Immigrants+4Good For African Americans+3Good For Hispanic Americans+3Good For Low Income Households+3Good For Students+3Good For Young Adults+3Good For L G B T Q Community+2Good For Middle Class Households+2Good For Union Workers+2Good For Urban Residents+2
- Governance And Ideology
- Improves Freedom Of Speech+9Improves Government Transparency+8Improves Due Process+6Increases Federal Power+3
- Social Issues And Justice
- Improves Freedom Of Speech+9Improves Policing Reform+8Improves Racial Equity+2
- 7/30/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 6/8/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
- Introduced in Senate
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
John HickenlooperDemocrat · Colorado