The final days of June 2026 saw a significant victory and a significant loss for YouTuber and Attorney Shield spokesperson SeanPaul “Long Island Audit” Reyes as an appeals court resolved a question in his on-going lawsuit against the State of New York and he received a resolution of federal charges against him from an incident at a military base earlier this year.
Starting with the Federal charges out of Washington State. Reyes filmed himself at the front entrance of Joint Base Lewis – McChord in Washington State. He was charged with Entering Military/Naval/Coast Guard Property and Photographing and sketching defense installations and was set for an initial hearing on June 24, 2026.
Since the filing, Reyes posted in response to a video that YouTuber Merb34st released on Reyes and his current legal woes indicating that he would be paying a $250.00 fine to resolve both tickets from the incident.
As the court filings had not been updated, there was no easy way to verify Reyes’s claims. That verification came on Wednesday as the court posted the following:
Payment $250.00 received on 06/23/2026 for Citation(s) “Entering Military/Naval/Coast Guard property”. (CVB Auto) (Entered: 06/24/2026)
Presumably, this will bring about the end of the charges against the YouTuber in the matter.
Reyes’s was not so lucky with a ruling that will dramatically impact his on-going litigation against the City and State of New York.
The YouTuber originally filed sue in the Southern District of New York in July 24, 2023 following an April incident in the same year where he was arrested for trespassing after attempting to film inside a Brooklyn area Police Precinct in New York City.
Reyes claimed in the suit that New York City and State passed individual “Right to Record” laws in the wake of George Floyd’s death that reaffirmed the public’s right to record the police. Reyes contended that the right to record police upended previous rulings that allowed police to define police precincts as non-public forums and prohibit filming within police facilities.
The district attorney ultimately declined to prosecute that case and the charges were dropped.
That lawsuit was stalled after Reyes moved for a preliminary injunction to prohibit application of the trespass policy and require removal of precinct signage announcing the policy. While the district court granted the motion, concluding that Reyes would likely fail on first amendment grounds but had a case under the two Right to Record laws, the defense filed an appeal to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. The case has been on hold for nearly a year as it awaited the Second Circuit’s ruling.
The Second Circuit initially modified the lower court’s order and for a time, Reyes has been the only person in the city and state of New York who had the ability to record within New York Police Precincts without being trespassed.
Ultimately, the Second Circuit was asked to consider the following question: “Does either N.Y. Civil Rights Law § 79-p or Administrative Code of the City of New York §§ 14-189 afford individuals such as plaintiff Reyes the right to video record law enforcement activities inside the publicly accessible lobbies of police stationhouses?”
The court returned a negative response to the question, writing:
Plaintiff’s interpretation of the RTRAs leads to absurd results. First, plaintiff’s contention that the RTRAs apply to precinct lobbies implicates significant privacy concerns.6 As the District Court found, the City has “shown an intent to ensure that victims of crimes receive emergency social and medical services as soon as possible and enjoy a ‘freedom from intimidation, threats or harassment’ ” (2023 WL 7212192, *8), quoting Executive Law § 641 [providing objectives of “fair treatment standards” for crime victims]). Permitting members of the public to record events and individuals in precinct lobbies would violate the privacy interests of crime victims, witnesses, confidential informants, and undercover officers. Indeed, when victims of sensitive crimes like human trafficking, domestic violence, or sexual assault enter a stationhouse lobby to report the crime officers—as a matter of policy—turn off their body worn cameras (2023 WL 7212192, *8-9). If anyone could enter the precinct lobby and begin recording, victims (and others) would be disincentivized from reporting crimes and providing information crucial to law enforcement. The danger is real; as the Legislature and City Council understood, anyone with a cellular telephone can record a private moment or conversation, then instantly post the recording, or livestream their observations, leading to instantaneous worldwide dissemination (see supra at n 3).
Plaintiff asserts that to protect privacy the NYPD has adopted several mitigating policies and procedures to protect individuals’ privacy, including private facilities for certain victims and witnesses. Beyond the absence of any such information in the record, the SRTRA applies statewide and many police stationhouses outside New York City have fewer resources than the NYPD and may not be able to provide similar privacy protections.7
Second, video recording and dissemination of individual stationhouses located throughout the State could reveal confidential investigative information and jeopardize officers’ strategic responses to criminal activity (see 2023 WL 7212192, *8-9). Surely, the State Legislature and City Council did not intend to invade personal privacy interests and jeopardize law enforcement and public safety by extending video recording to publicly accessible precinct lobbies, at least not without expressly stating so. Not only are such declarations missing from the RTRAs, both statutes expressly disavow any intention of permitting activities that “physically interfere” with “law enforcement activity” (Civil Rights Law § 79-p [2]) or “an official and lawful police function” (Administrative Code § 14-189 [b]). Accordingly, the certified question, as reformulated, should be answered in the negative.
The case will now return to the lower court and presumably move forward to a resolution.
This is an on-going news story.
