United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 24-1099 DONALD NICODEMUS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, Defendant-Appellee and STATE OF INDIANA, Intervenor-Appellee. ____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division. No. 23-cv-00744 — Damon R. Leichty, Judge. ____________________

ARGUED SEPTEMBER 27, 2024 — DECIDED MAY 15, 2025 ____________________

Before BRENNAN, JACKSON-AKIWUMI, and PRYOR, Circuit Judges. PRYOR, Circuit Judge. Indiana has a “buffer law” making it a crime for a person to knowingly or intentionally approach an officer who is “lawfully engaged in the execution of the 2 No. 24-1099 law enforcement officer’s duties after the law enforcement of- ficer has ordered the person to stop approaching.” Indiana Code (I.C.) § 35-44.1-2-14. Seeking declaratory and injunctive relief, Donald Nicodemus, a citizen-journalist, challenged the law as facially unconstitutional. He argues that it violates his First Amendment right to record the police in public spaces. After consolidating Nicodemus’s motion for a preliminary in- junction with a trial on the merits, the district court found In- diana’s buffer law to be constitutional because it only had an “incidental effect” on the public’s First Amendment right to record and scrutinize police activity. The district court denied Nicodemus’s injunction request and entered final judgment for the defendants. For the reasons below, we affirm. I. BACKGROUND

A. Factual Background There was a full bench trial in this case, so we defer to the district court’s findings of fact in the absence of clear error. Green v. UPS Health & Welfare Package for Retired Emps., 595 F.3d 734, 736 (7th Cir. 2010). The parties do not dispute the district court’s factual findings, so we begin there. Id. Nicodemus is a citizen journalist from South Bend whose YouTube channel, “Freedom 2 Film,” has over 23,000 sub- scribers. Nicodemus records police activity in and around South Bend and posts his recordings to his channel. He also “livestreams” police activity, meaning he broadcasts police activity live for his YouTube subscribers to view in real time. He does this to bring awareness to the public of police con- duct, assist in ending inappropriate or problematic law en- forcement behavior, and educate the public of “newsworthy activities.” No. 24-1099 3

After midnight on July 20, 2023, shots were fired in down- town South Bend, Indiana, at the intersection of North Brookfield Street and Lincoln Way West. Nicodemus hurried to the scene. When he arrived, police were at the southwest corner of the intersection marking bullet casings. Six squad cars were present, with some blocking parts of the road. Nic- odemus positioned himself on the sidewalk at the northeast corner of the intersection, joining a group of onlookers, and began livestreaming. Soon after, Officer Nathan Stepp walked up to the group and told them to move back. Invoking the buffer law, he counted off 25 feet from the west side of Brookfield Street, where a squad car was parked, and told Nicodemus and the others to move behind the imaginary 25-foot buffer line. Nic- odemus was already across the street from the squad car, so he only had to move back a few feet. He continued recording while conversing with and criticizing the officers. Then came a disturbance on the north side of Lincoln Way, past the intersection. Nicodemus could not see what was hap- p