Last month, a federal judge upheld a man’s convictions for recording a video inside a U.S. Social Security Administration office in Littleton without permission, despite his claim that he was trying to “test the First Amendment.”

Christopher J. Cordova was convicted of two misdemeanors for failure to comply with official signs and illegally photographing federal property. He received a sentence of 15 days in jail, two years of probation and a $3,000 fine.

Córdova argued in the appeal that his recording was “part of his journalistic expression” and that the regulation against video recording was an inappropriate restriction on freedom of expression.

But in an order of October 15U.S. District Court Judge Nina Y. Wang noted that any restrictions within the Social Security Administration office only had to be reasonable. Furthermore, he believed that the recording ban had a legitimate purpose.

“While defendant argues that ‘the act of recording is silent and non-disruptive,’ this general assertion is belied by his conduct in this case, which did causing disruption at the SSA office,” Wang wrote, “diverting the attention of security guards and requiring the arrival of additional security guards and police officers, not to mention causing a commotion that was likely distracting and may have been distressing for SSA employees and clients.”

Cordova and a handful of others arrived at the Social Security office on Southpark Lane on August 2, 2022. Cordova used a camera to record at the entrance for approximately three hours. Security personnel later alleged that the group was “declaring that it had a constitutional right to film inside government buildings.”

Believing they were “First Amendment Auditors“—those who record in public spaces to test their free speech rights—security staff told the group that they could remain at the entrance but could not record inside the office itself, where clients interacted with staff from Social Security and revealed their personally identifiable information. Posted The signage also warned against video recording.

The auditors allegedly called law enforcement officers “tyrants” and threatened to sue. The elderly clients allegedly “stated that they felt intimidated and threatened by the auditors,” one officer wrote. Finally, Córdova entered the Social Security office and an officer arrested him. The other auditors allegedly “applauded and seemed to have gotten what they wanted,” another officer wrote.

Federal prosecutors charged Cordova, alleging that he “thought YouTube fame and money trumped the privacy rights of Social Security Administration customers.” They also claimed that Cordova earned $11,000 from his YouTube channel in the months after the video of their encounter was posted.

For his part, Cordova explained to Chief United States Judge Michael E. Hegarty that he was “trying to create jurisprudence in the state of Colorado” and “test the First Amendment.” She also compared herself to Rosa Parks.

Hegarty found Córdova guilty on both charges.

In part, Hegarty rejected Córdova’s argument that the Social Security office, where customers waited to speak with employees, was a “lobby” in which recording for informational purposes was permitted. He noted that the office was where the Social Security Administration “conducted its primary activities.”

“It is clear from the regulation, the signage at the SSA entrance, the instructions given by authorities, and Mr. Cordova’s own understanding of the law, that he had fair knowledge of the law and that his conduct in filming beyond the interior glass doors was punishable,” Hegarty wrote in March 2023. “While I respect your right to defy the law and test your constitutional rights to the outer limit, in this case you are wrong.”

Wang, the district judge, rejected all of Córdova’s arguments on appeal. He disagreed that the recording ban was too broad, since it applied only to spaces occupied by federal agencies.

“And despite defendant’s suggestion that the properties covered by the regulation cannot share any common purpose, their shared purpose is simple: to conduct the business of the federal government,” Wang wrote.

He also disputed the claim that Hegarty improperly convicted Cordova based on Cordova’s arrest after trial in Colorado Springs for similar conduct at a government building. Although prosecutors asked for a harsher sentence in light of Cordova’s repeated conduct, Wang found no evidence that Hegarty considered Cordova’s arrest when handing down his sentence.

the case is United States against Córdoba.