Georgia House committee backs limits on police video release, adds press exemption

ATLANTA, Ga. (Atlanta News First) — Georgia lawmakers advanced a proposal Tuesday that could make it harder for the public to obtain some police video, while creating a carve-out for credentialed journalists after days of criticism from civil liberties advocates and news organizations.

The bill, moving through the General Assembly, targets access to law enforcement recordings — including body-worn and dash camera video — and mugshots.

Supporters argue websites and Youtubers are requesting massive amounts of footage of people in distress, especially near death, often spreads online and revictimizes families.

“They came to the police department, upset with us, wanted to know how he could get his image off the internet. And we had to tell him. we can’t help you now. That image and that video lives on the internet,” said Suwanee Police Chief Cass Mooney during a recent hearing.

Opponents counter that restricting access to such footage can reduce government transparency, particularly in cases involving deaths during encounters with police.

“This bill is the worst-case scenario for government transparency and civil liberties,” said Sarah Hunt-Blackwell with the American Civil Liberties Union of Georgia.

Amendments adopted in committee would create a media carve-out for credentialed members of the Georgia Association of Broadcasters and the Georgia Press Association, supporters said, allowing journalists a separate pathway to request records.

But the revisions also add a significant new barrier: They would generally block release of audio or video showing a person in distress immediately before death, unless a judge later orders its release.

Randy Gravley of the Georgia Association of Broadcasters called the changes a compromise.

“We may not totally 100% support the bill, but it lands us at a place where we can continue doing the work each and every day,” Gravley said.

The proposal now heads toward a vote in the House, where lawmakers could still revise the language. The debate is expected to focus on whether the press carve-out remains intact and how much control families should have over death-related law enforcement video.