The right to record

The Bill of Rights launches with the First Amendment for a powerful reason: Freedom of press, speech, assembly and worship were what animated the United States of America from its inception. Which is why photographer and videographer Douglas Higginbotham’s wrongful-arrest lawsuit against the NYPD is so important, and why nearly 60 media organizations, including the Daily News, signed a brief backing Higginbotham’s appeal.

During the 2011 Occupy Wall Street protests at Zuccotti Park, Higginbotham, camera in hand, climbed atop a phone booth to get a better angle on the protests.

After recording some footage from that perch with no problem, he came back to the ground, conferred with his reporter and got back atop the phone booth just as police moved in to begin clearing protesters.

At this point officers ordered him to get down — because he was, Higginbotham contends, now filming cops having violent encounters with protesters. Officers then yanked him down and arrested him for disorderly conduct.

Higginbotham sued for false arrest. In November, a federal judge ruled in favor of the NYPD’s request for summary judgment against him.

Wrong. A journalist has a right to document police. Nor in this country are any special protections afforded people who happen to carry notepads or cameras for a living; those rights are broadly guaranteed.

While police can narrowly cordon off territory to prevent interference with their work or when public safety is at stake, they must not abuse that authority to shield themselves from scrutiny.