Key term here is, may be sued.

I think it's great that these decisions are widespread and unambiguous, however on the street in real time, they basically don't matter.

From a cop's perspective they evaluate it like this: There is a very high risk of a shit storm coming from someone releasing a video of me doing something questionable. Alternatively there is a fairly low risk that if I take or break that same person's camera that they will accurately identify me, find legal counsel, sue me and then stick out the trial backed by police union and LEO supporters. Even if all that happened, the likely outcome is that I would get suspended with pay.

So it seems pretty clear cut that for officers that would have the intention of obstructing first amendment protections, because of their actions, that any legal recourse is trivial compared to the alternative of letting anyone film whatever.