Apparently a unanimous decision from the First Circuit Court, issued Friday, 26 August 2011. Hopefully this opens up a crack in that "Thin Blue Line".
If this be Treason, then make the most of it. Patrick Henry, May 1765
“If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind? ” -Bastiat
I don't "need" to openly carry a handgun or own an "assault weapon" any more than Rosa Parks needed a seat on the bus.
It wasn't a unanimous opinion of the court, because it wasn't an en banc hearing. It was a three judge panel.
Boston could request a hearing by the full court, but since both the district court and the panel have already slammed them, their odds aren't getting any better by going higher up the chain.
This was an interlocutory appeal over immunity; the civil case itself is still pending in district court. As a civil case it doesn't overturn the law nor set precedent for criminal cases, but it does reaffirm what was already case law in the 1st Circuit: that there is a clearly established 1st Amendment right to openly record police, with or without their consent, while they perform their duties in a public space.