Reform Councilman Fights Illegal Ban on Video Recording of Council Meetings

Tortorice v. City of Margaret

Matthew Tortorice was elected to Margaret, Alabama’s city council in 2020 as a reform candidate. He anticipated some resistance, but over the last several months, city officials have systematically suppressed his First Amendment rights.

Since his election, Matthew has proposed modest reforms to bring his city in line with reasonable government practices. He advocates for detailed, public budgets, redrawing the outdated and illegal district lines to correspond with city population changes, and most relevant, to increase transparency by providing video recordings of council meetings.

To thwart the last of these efforts, fellow council members passed a rule prohibiting the use of video recordings in public council meetings, in violation of both Alabama law and the First Amendment. As Matthew fought to defend his rights and those of his constituents, he faced hostility, even threats of violence.

On October 10, 2024, CIR filed a federal lawsuit to stop this violation of Matthew’s free speech rights, which also supports the free speech rights of the public to view the unfiltered council proceedings.

Illegal Ban on Public Recordings from Public Meetings

In keeping with Alabama’s Open Meetings Act, Matthew has worked hard to increase the visibility of the Margaret City Council. Because the City was taking no steps to do so, Matthew began video recording the Council’s public meetings in February 2023 and posting the videos to his YouTube channel.

No disruption has ever resulted from these recordings. Matthew placed his camera on a tripod near a side wall of the council room to keep his equipment from blocking anyone in attendance. Between February 2023 and June 2024, Matthew recorded every meeting that he attended.

The council first took action to suppress his filming at the July 2, 2024, meeting, which Matthew was unable to attend. The council voted to prohibit all audio or video recordings of its meetings. Matthew was not notified until the August 6 meeting, when the Mayor Pro Tem Daryl McIntyre asked him to remove his recording equipment.

Two weeks later, Matthew again set up his camera. This time, City Attorney Erskine Funderburg made a statement about the need to enforce the Council’s ban on recording. Matthew protested that the ban violated state law and the First Amendment, but on McIntyre’s instruction, Police Chief Fields ejected Matthew from the room.

Violent Speech Suppression

At a special meeting on September 10, Chief Fields would not allow anyone with a camera into the room. Matthew participated without his camera. WBRC Fox 6 News was prevented from bringing a camera into the meeting room. And two freelance YouTube reporters were prevented from entering at all.

After the meeting, McIntyre – gesturing with his fists from three feet away – yelled that he would “fix [Matthew] permanently.” Council Member Darius Crump then started yelling at Matthew. At this point, Chief Fields urged Matthew to leave for his own safety. Crump followed Matthew out of the building, then lunged at him, before a police officer restrained him. Crump yelled – “They won’t be here for you every time.”

Because the original recording ban was clearly unsustainable, McIntyre secured approval of a new set of written rules at the next meeting on September 17 that were more targeted to violate Matthew’s rights. The new rules provide that: “No employee, officer or agent of the city will be able to record a meeting other than in the designated press areas along with other members of the press.”

At a Council meeting on October 1, Matthew again attempted to set up his camera. Though no one prohibited him from bringing it in, he was instructed to move his camera to the rear of the room, near a loud air conditioning unit that made it nearly impossible to hear the council members, especially those who did not use a microphone.

The City’s persistent efforts to prevent Matthew from recording public meetings and targeting him based on his disfavored views violate Matthew’s First Amendment rights. They also violate the right of the public to listen to the City Council’s public deliberations. CIR has filed a lawsuit seeking damages for past injuries, a declaration that the city’s recording ban is unconstitutional, and an injunction against its enforcement.