Appeals court trying to uphold Anit-Paparazzi law

An appeals court recommends that charges against a photographer be reinstated after recklessly following pop star Justin Bieber.

According to the Los Angeles Times the appellate court wants Judge Thomas Rubinson to reconsider his ruling from November on photographer Paul Raef. If Rubinson stands by his decision saying that part of the charges were unconstitutional then the three judge appeals court will have to have a full hearing.

"The statute is not constitutionally infirm because it is neither vague nor over-broad," the panel wrote in its Jan. 28 conclusions.

Raef was charged with four misdemeanors back in November. One of them was recklessly driving with the intent to capture pictures for commercial gain, reports E! News. If that and the misdemeanor for following a vehicle too closely are reinstated then Raef could face fines up to $3,500 and one year in county jail. If not, then the most he would have to pay is $1,000 in fines and 90 days in prison.

Some see the law against paparazzi as a violation to the 1st Amendment because it’s too vague and goes against the protected rights of other photographers such a wedding photographers. Others see the law as protecting citizens from photographers doing whatever they have to to get the picture.

"The city attorney continues to believe that the law is constitutional, protects public safety and welcomes the notice issued by the appellate division," the office said in a statement. "We look forward to another opportunity to hear the matter in the trial court."