A new statute passed by the Texas legislature bars television production companies from riding along with law enforcement officers and filming them for reality television programs, effectively banning shows like Cops and Live PD from filming in the State. But the law’s sweeping prohibition likely runs afoul of the First Amendment, and it’s only a matter of time until the ban is challenged in court.

The law was named for Javier Ambler, who died of heart failure after being tased by sheriff’s deputies in Williamson County as a crew from Live PD accompanied and filmed them. It provides that “[a] law enforcement agency may not authorize a person to accompany and film a peace officer acting in the line of duty for the purpose of producing a reality television program.” A “reality television program” is defined as a “nonfictional television program that features the same live subjects over the course of more than one episode primarily for entertainment purpose.” In an effort to address its constitutional infirmities, the law excludes from its reach “reporting on a matter of public concern by a journalist.”

But the Texas legislature’s attempt to distinguish news from entertainment, and journalists from TV producers, draws a constitutionally suspect line that courts have routinely rejected. As several recent cases have made clear, the First Amendment protects the right to film police interacting with citizens. That right belongs to television producers as well as journalists and anyone in between. The statute violates that right by making arbitrary distinctions between filming for “entertainment” purposes and filming for “public concern” purposes. Is a three-part television magazine exposé about drug traffickers on the Mexican border “entertainment?” If so, under the Texas statute it would be unlawful for the producers of that program to ride along with police as they attempt to interdict drug traffickers. If not, it is difficult to see the difference between that program and Live PD, which followed local police and sheriff’s deputies as they attempted to protect citizens and prevent crime.

The law’s supporters claim – without evidence – that it will prevent future incidents like Ambler’s death because the presence of television cameras affects how police behave. In fact, a recent study by the prestigious National Academy of Sciences found that the use of body cameras “did not meaningfully affect police behavior on a range of outcomes, including complaints and use of force.” More important, the law chills speech because it is vague and overbroad, and infringes on the right of the press and public to observe the functioning of government, cloaking it in darkness for fear that the public be entertained.