Recording Police by State (2026)

Alabama is a one-party consent state for recording:

• Alabama requires one-party consent (Ala. Code § 13A-11-31) — you can record any conversation you are part of
• Recording police in public is protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot order you to stop recording or seize your device without a warrant
• Alabama does not have a statewide body camera mandate

Alaska is a one-party consent state for recording:

• Under Alaska Stat. § 42.20.310, only one party to a conversation needs to consent to recording
• You may record police officers performing their duties in public — protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot lawfully order you to stop recording, delete footage, or seize your device without a warrant
• Alaska State Troopers have a body camera program; local department adoption varies
• Alaska's strong privacy rights under Art. I, § 22 of the state constitution may provide additional protections in certain recording contexts

Arizona is a one-party consent state for recording, and recording police in public is constitutionally protected:

• Arizona requires only one-party consent to record conversations (A.R.S. § 13-3005) — you can record any conversation you are part of
• Recording police officers performing duties in public is protected under the First Amendment
• In 2022, Arizona enacted A.R.S. § 13-3732 which attempted to make it a misdemeanor to record police activity within 8 feet. However, a federal court permanently blocked this law in 2023 as unconstitutional under the First Amendment, and Arizona's Attorney General conceded it was unconstitutional. The law is unenforceable.
• Officers cannot order you to stop recording, delete recordings, or seize your device without a warrant
• Do not physically interfere with officers while recording — maintain a safe distance as a practical matter, not a legal requirement

Arkansas is a one-party consent state for recording:

• Under Ark. Code § 5-60-120, only one party to a conversation needs to consent to recording
• You may record police officers performing their duties in public — protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot lawfully order you to stop recording, delete footage, or seize your device without a warrant
• Arkansas enacted Act 1030 of 2021 prohibiting police from interfering with lawful recording of officers
• Body camera adoption varies by department across Arkansas

California is a two-party consent state for audio recording, which creates an important distinction:

• Video recording: Fully protected. You can record police performing duties in public spaces without restriction.
• Audio recording: California Penal Code § 632 requires all-party consent for recording "confidential communications." However, police performing duties in public are generally not having "confidential" conversations, so recording them is typically legal.
• AB 748 (2018): Requires law enforcement agencies to release body camera footage within 45 days of a critical incident (use of force, in-custody death).
• SB 1421 (2018): Made certain police personnel records public, including records of officer shootings and confirmed dishonesty.

Colorado is a one-party consent state for recording, and recording police in public is constitutionally protected:

• Colorado is a one-party consent state — you can record any conversation you are part of without notifying the other party (CRS § 18-9-303)
• Recording police officers performing public duties is protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot order you to stop recording, delete recordings, or seize your device without a warrant
• Colorado's 2020 police reform law (SB 20-217) specifically addresses officer accountability and transparency
• Colorado law requires officers to activate body cameras during interactions with the public
• Do not physically interfere with officers while recording — maintain a safe distance
• Body camera footage is subject to CORA (Colorado Open Records Act) requests

Connecticut is an all-party consent state for recording, with important exceptions:

• Connecticut Gen. Stat. § 52-570d requires all parties to consent to recording of private conversations
• However, recording police officers performing duties in public is protected under the First Amendment — police activity in public is not a "private conversation"
• Officers cannot lawfully order you to stop recording public police activity
• Connecticut mandated body cameras for state police by 2022 under Public Act 20-1
• Be aware that recording private conversations with police (e.g., in your home during a non-public interaction) without consent could violate state wiretapping law

D.C. is a one-party consent jurisdiction with strong recording protections:

• One-party consent: D.C. Code § 23-542 allows recording any conversation you are a party to. Bystander recording of police in public is also protected.
• First Amendment Assemblies Act (2004): Specifically protects the right to record during protests and demonstrations. Police cannot order protesters or journalists to stop recording.
• NEAR Act (Neighborhood Engagement Achieves Results): Part of D.C.'s police reform efforts, requiring transparency in policing practices.
• Comprehensive body camera program: MPD has one of the largest body camera programs in the country. Officers who fail to activate cameras face disciplinary action, and footage can be requested through FOIA.

Florida is an all-parties consent state with important exceptions for recording police:

• Fla. Stat. § 934.03: Florida's wiretapping statute requires all parties to consent to recording of oral communications made with a reasonable expectation of privacy.
• Public duty exception: Police performing duties in public generally have no reasonable expectation of privacy, so recording them is typically lawful. The 11th Circuit has upheld the right to record police.
• Body camera requirements: Many Florida departments use body cameras. Under Fla. Stat. § 943.1718, law enforcement agencies that use body cameras must have policies governing their use and must make footage available under Florida's broad public records law.

Hawaii is a one-party consent state for recording:

• Under HRS § 803-42, only one party to a conversation needs to consent to recording
• Recording police officers performing their duties in public is protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot lawfully order you to stop recording or seize your device without a warrant
• The Honolulu Police Commission provides civilian oversight of the Honolulu Police Department
• Each county has its own police department and commission structure
• Body camera policies vary by county department

Idaho is a one-party consent state for recording:

• Under Idaho Code § 18-6702, only one party to a conversation needs to consent to recording
• You may record police officers performing their duties in public — protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot lawfully order you to stop recording, delete footage, or seize your device without a warrant
• Idaho does not have a statewide body camera mandate — adoption varies by department
• Idaho has strong police protections; civilian oversight boards are uncommon in the state

Illinois is a two-party consent state with important reforms protecting recording of police:

• Reformed eavesdropping law (720 ILCS 5/14-2): After the Illinois Supreme Court struck down the old all-party consent statute in People v. Clark (2014) and People v. Melongo (2014), the legislature enacted a reformed law. The current statute does NOT prohibit recording police performing their duties in public — it only restricts recording private conversations where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy.
• Right to record protected: Recording police officers in public is protected under the 1st Amendment, as affirmed by the 7th Circuit in ACLU of Illinois v. Alvarez (2012).
• Body camera law: The Illinois Law Enforcement Officer-Worn Body Camera Act (50 ILCS 706) requires departments that use body cameras to follow specific recording, retention, and disclosure policies.

Indiana is a one-party consent state for recording, and recording police in public is constitutionally protected:

• Indiana is a one-party consent state — you can record any conversation you are part of without notifying the other party (IC § 35-33.5-5-5)
• Recording police officers performing public duties is protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot order you to stop recording, delete recordings, or seize your device without a warrant
• Indiana does not have a specific statute addressing the right to record police, but constitutional protections apply
• Do not physically interfere with officers while recording — maintain a safe distance
• Body camera footage in Indiana may be subject to public records requests under the Access to Public Records Act (IC § 5-14-3)

Iowa is a one-party consent state for recording:

• Under Iowa Code § 808B.2, only one party to a communication needs to consent to recording
• You may record police officers performing their duties in public — protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot lawfully order you to stop recording, delete footage, or seize your device without a warrant
• Body camera usage is increasing across Iowa — the Des Moines Police Department has a body camera program
• Iowa does not have statewide civilian oversight — oversight is department-level

Kansas is a one-party consent state for recording:

• Under K.S.A. § 21-6101, only one party to a communication needs to consent to recording
• You may record police officers performing their duties in public — protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot lawfully order you to stop recording, delete footage, or seize your device without a warrant
• Body camera adoption is growing in Kansas; major departments in Wichita, Kansas City, and Topeka have programs
• Kansas has limited statewide civilian oversight

Kentucky is a one-party consent state:

• Kentucky requires one-party consent (KRS § 526.020) — you can record any conversation you are part of
• Recording police in public is protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot order you to stop recording or seize your device without a warrant
• Kentucky does not have a statewide body camera mandate, though many agencies use them

Louisiana is a one-party consent state for recording:

• Louisiana requires one-party consent (La. R.S. § 15:1303) — you can record any conversation you are part of
• Recording police in public is protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot order you to stop recording or seize your device without a warrant
• Louisiana does not have a statewide body camera mandate, though many agencies use them

Maine is a one-party consent state for recording:

• Under 15 M.R.S.A. § 709, only one party to a conversation needs to consent to recording
• Recording police in public is protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot lawfully order you to stop recording or confiscate your device without a warrant
• Maine enacted significant police accountability reforms in 2023, including expanded civilian oversight
• Body cameras are expanding across Maine departments — the 2023 reforms encourage their adoption
• The Maine Attorney General's office investigates police use-of-force incidents

Maryland remains a two-party (all-party) consent state for recording private communications, but recording police in public is protected:

• Maryland requires the consent of all parties to record a private conversation (MD Code, Courts & Judicial Proceedings § 10-402). Violations were reclassified from a felony to a misdemeanor under 2023 reforms (SB 38)
• Recording police officers performing public duties is protected under the First Amendment — this is separate from the wiretapping law
• Officers cannot order you to stop recording, delete recordings, or seize your device without a warrant
• MD law specifically prohibits interference with a person's right to record law enforcement activities (MD Code, Criminal Law § 10-410)
• Do not physically interfere with officers while recording — maintain a safe distance

Michigan is a one-party consent state, and recording police in public is protected:

• Michigan's Eavesdropping Act (MCL § 750.539) requires one-party consent — you can record any conversation you are part of
• Recording police officers performing duties in public spaces is protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot order you to stop recording, delete recordings, or seize your device without a warrant
• Michigan does not have a specific statute protecting the right to record police, but federal constitutional protections apply
• Do not physically interfere with officers while recording — maintain a safe distance
• Third-party recordings of conversations you are not part of require all-party consent in some interpretations — exercise caution recording private conversations between others

Minnesota is a one-party consent state for recording:

• Minnesota requires one-party consent (Minn. Stat. § 626A.02) — you can record any conversation you are part of
• Recording police performing duties in public is protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot order you to stop recording, delete footage, or seize your device without a warrant
• Minnesota mandates body cameras for state patrol and many municipal police departments
• Body camera data is subject to the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (MGDPA) with certain classifications

Mississippi is a one-party consent state for recording:

• Under Miss. Code Ann. § 41-29-531, only one party to a communication needs to consent to recording
• You may record police officers performing their duties in public — protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot lawfully order you to stop recording or confiscate your device without a warrant
• Body camera adoption varies by department — Jackson and other larger cities have programs
• Mississippi has limited civilian oversight mechanisms

Missouri is a one-party consent state for recording, and recording police in public is constitutionally protected:

• Missouri is a one-party consent state — you can record any conversation you are part of without notifying the other party (RSMo § 542.402)
• Recording police officers performing public duties is protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot order you to stop recording, delete recordings, or seize your device without a warrant
• Missouri does not have a specific statute addressing the right to record police, but First Amendment protections apply
• Do not physically interfere with officers while recording — maintain a safe distance
• Body camera footage in Missouri may be subject to public records requests under the Missouri Sunshine Law (RSMo § 610.010 et seq.)

Montana is a one-party consent state for recording, with unique privacy considerations:

• Under Mont. Code Ann. § 45-8-213, only one party to a conversation needs to consent to recording
• Recording police officers in public is protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot lawfully order you to stop recording or confiscate your device without a warrant
• Montana's strong constitutional privacy right (Art. II, § 10) creates additional protections against government surveillance
• Limited civilian oversight exists in Montana — most accountability is through internal affairs
• Body camera policies vary by department; not mandated statewide

Nebraska is a one-party consent state for recording:

• Under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 86-290, only one party to a conversation needs to consent to recording
• You may record police officers performing their duties in public — this is protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot legally order you to stop recording, delete footage, or confiscate your device without a warrant
• Omaha has a civilian oversight board — the Citizen Complaint Review Board — that reviews police conduct complaints
• Body camera usage varies by department; Omaha and Lincoln police departments have body camera programs

Nevada is a one-party consent state for recording:

• Under Nev. Rev. Stat. § 200.620, only one party to a communication needs to consent to recording (for in-person conversations)
• Note: telephone conversations require all-party consent under § 200.620(1) — but in-person recording is one-party
• You may record police officers performing their duties in public — protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot lawfully order you to stop recording public police activity
• Las Vegas Metropolitan Police have a comprehensive body camera program

New Hampshire is an all-party consent state for recording all private communications — both telephone and in-person:

• RSA 570-A:2 requires all-party consent for recording telephone, electronic, and oral communications
• However, recording police officers performing duties in public spaces is protected by the First Amendment — this is a constitutional right separate from the state wiretapping law
• The First Amendment protects your right to openly record any government official in a public setting
• Officers cannot lawfully order you to stop recording or seize your device without a warrant
• Be cautious about recording any private conversations (phone or in-person) without all parties' consent — violations can carry criminal penalties

New Jersey is an all-parties consent state for audio recording, creating important nuances:

• NJ Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act: Requires consent of all parties to record oral communications. However, this applies to communications made with an expectation of privacy.
• Public duty exception: Police performing official duties in public spaces generally have no reasonable expectation of privacy in their communications, so recording them is typically lawful.
• AG Directive 2015-1: Established statewide use-of-force reporting requirements and mandated body cameras for state troopers. Local departments have been rolling out body cameras under AG directives.
• Internal Affairs guidelines: NJ AG Internal Affairs Policy requires all complaints, including those involving recording disputes, to be investigated.

New Mexico is a one-party consent state for recording:

• Under NMSA § 30-12-1, only one party to a communication needs to consent to recording
• You may record police officers performing their duties in public — protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot lawfully order you to stop recording or confiscate your device without a warrant
• Albuquerque has one of the nation's most extensive body camera programs following a DOJ consent decree
• The Albuquerque Police Department is under federal oversight for use-of-force issues

New York is a one-party consent state, making it relatively straightforward to record police:

• One-party consent: Under NY Penal Law § 250.00, you can record any conversation you are a party to without the other person's consent. This clearly protects recording your own interactions with police.
• Bystander recording: Recording police from a public space is protected under the 1st Amendment as affirmed by the 2nd Circuit.
• Right to Know Act (NYC): NYPD officers must identify themselves and explain the reason for a stop or search. This works alongside your right to record.
• Chokehold ban: NYC Local Law 2020/064 ("Eric Garner Anti-Chokehold Act") makes it a criminal offense for police to use chokeholds or sit/kneel on a person's chest/back in a way that compresses their diaphragm.

North Carolina is a one-party consent state for recording, and recording police performing public duties is constitutionally protected:

• NC is a one-party consent state — you can record any conversation you are part of without notifying the other party (N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-287)
• You have a First Amendment right to record police officers performing duties in public spaces
• Officers cannot order you to stop recording, delete recordings, or seize your device without a warrant
• NC has specific laws regarding police body camera footage — public access is limited and requires a court order under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 132-1.4A
• Do not physically interfere with officers while recording — maintain a safe distance

North Dakota is a one-party consent state for recording:

• Under N.D. Cent. Code § 12.1-15-02, only one party to a communication needs to consent to recording
• You may record police officers performing their duties in public — protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot lawfully order you to stop recording or confiscate your device without a warrant
• Body camera usage varies by department — Fargo and Bismarck police have body camera programs
• North Dakota has limited civilian oversight mechanisms

Oklahoma is a one-party consent state for recording:

• Oklahoma requires one-party consent (13 Okl. St. § 176.4) — you can record any conversation you are part of
• Recording police in public is protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot order you to stop recording or seize your device without a warrant
• Oklahoma does not have a statewide body camera mandate

Oregon has a nuanced recording law under ORS § 165.540:

• Telephone calls: one-party consent — you can record any phone call you are part of without telling the other party
• In-person conversations: Oregon requires all-party consent for recording private in-person conversations. A 2023 Ninth Circuit panel initially struck down this requirement for public conversations, but the en banc Ninth Circuit reversed that decision in January 2025, upholding Oregon's law as constitutional
• Recording police performing duties in public is protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot order you to stop recording or seize your device without a warrant
• Oregon has body camera requirements for many agencies

Pennsylvania is an all-parties consent state, creating important nuances for recording police:

• 18 Pa.C.S. § 5703: Pennsylvania's wiretapping statute requires all parties to consent to audio recording of communications. However, police performing duties in public generally have no reasonable expectation of privacy.
• 3rd Circuit protection: In Fields v. City of Philadelphia (2017), the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals held that recording police in public is protected by the 1st Amendment. This is binding law in Pennsylvania.
• Public vs. private distinction: Recording police in public is protected. Recording private conversations between officers may still implicate the wiretapping statute.

Rhode Island is a one-party consent state for recording:

• Under R.I. Gen. Laws § 11-35-21, only one party to a communication needs to consent to recording
• You may record police officers performing their duties in public — protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot lawfully order you to stop recording or confiscate your device without a warrant
• Rhode Island has enacted body camera requirements for state and local police
• Providence has a civilian oversight board

South Carolina is a one-party consent state for recording:

• SC law requires one-party consent (S.C. Code § 17-30-30) — you can record any conversation you are part of
• Recording police in public is protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot order you to stop recording or seize your device without a warrant
• SC requires body cameras for state law enforcement under S.C. Code § 23-1-240
• Body camera footage is subject to FOIA with certain exemptions

South Dakota is a one-party consent state for recording:

• Under SDCL § 23A-35A-20, only one party to a communication needs to consent to recording
• You may record police officers performing their duties in public — protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot lawfully order you to stop recording or confiscate your device without a warrant
• Body camera adoption varies by department
• South Dakota has limited civilian oversight mechanisms

Tennessee is a one-party consent state for recording, and recording police in public is constitutionally protected:

• TN is a one-party consent state — you can record any conversation you are part of without notifying the other party (TCA § 39-13-601)
• Recording police officers performing public duties is protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot order you to stop recording, delete recordings, or seize your device without a warrant
• Tennessee enacted a specific law (TCA § 39-13-610) making it an offense to interfere with certain emergency operations, but lawful recording from a safe distance is not interference
• Do not physically interfere with officers while recording — maintain a safe distance
• Body camera footage in TN is generally subject to public records requests under the Tennessee Public Records Act

Texas is a one-party consent state with strong protections for recording police:

• One-party consent: Texas Penal Code § 16.02 allows recording any conversation you are a party to. As a bystander, you may record police in public without being a party to the conversation.
• Texas law explicitly protects recording: Texas Occupations Code § 1701.657 states that a peace officer may not interfere with a person's right to record police activity as long as the person is not interfering with police duties.
• Sandra Bland Act (2017): Requires officers to explain why a person is being stopped and requires training on de-escalation. While not directly about recording, it establishes transparency requirements.

Utah is a one-party consent state for recording:

• Under Utah Code § 77-23a-4, only one party to a communication needs to consent to recording
• You may record police officers performing their duties in public — protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot lawfully order you to stop recording or confiscate your device without a warrant
• Utah requires body cameras for all law enforcement officers under HB 300 (2015)
• Salt Lake City has a Civilian Review Board

Vermont is a one-party consent state for recording:

• Under 13 V.S.A. § 1051, only one party to a communication needs to consent to recording
• You may record police officers performing their duties in public — protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot lawfully order you to stop recording or confiscate your device without a warrant
• Vermont has enacted body camera requirements for law enforcement
• Vermont has some of the strongest police accountability measures in the nation

Virginia is a one-party consent state, and recording police in public is constitutionally protected:

• Virginia law requires only one-party consent to record conversations (Va. Code § 19.2-62) — you can record any conversation you are part of
• Recording police officers performing duties in public is protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot order you to stop recording, delete footage, or confiscate your device without a warrant
• Virginia enacted body camera requirements for many law enforcement agencies, and body camera footage is subject to FOIA requests with certain exemptions
• Do not physically obstruct or interfere with officers while recording
• Recording in places with a reasonable expectation of privacy (e.g., private homes, restrooms) without consent of all parties may violate Virginia law

Washington is a two-party (all-party) consent state for recording private conversations, but recording police in public is still protected:

• Washington's Privacy Act (RCW 9.73.030) requires all-party consent to record private conversations
• However, recording police officers performing duties in public spaces is constitutionally protected — public interactions do not carry a reasonable expectation of privacy
• You may record police in public without obtaining their consent because public encounters are not "private" conversations under the law
• Officers cannot order you to stop recording public encounters, delete recordings, or confiscate your device without a warrant
• Be cautious about recording conversations you are NOT a party to in private settings — this may violate Washington law
• Do not physically interfere with officers while recording

Wisconsin is a one-party consent state for recording, and recording police in public is constitutionally protected:

• Wisconsin is a one-party consent state — you can record any conversation you are part of without notifying the other party (Wis. Stat. § 968.31)
• Recording police officers performing public duties is protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot order you to stop recording, delete recordings, or seize your device without a warrant
• Wisconsin does not have a specific statute addressing the right to record police, but constitutional protections apply
• Do not physically interfere with officers while recording — maintain a safe distance
• Body camera footage in Wisconsin is subject to public records requests under Wisconsin's Open Records Law (Wis. Stat. § 19.31 et seq.)

Wyoming is a one-party consent state for recording:

• Under Wyo. Stat. § 7-3-702, only one party to a communication needs to consent to recording
• You may record police officers performing their duties in public — protected under the First Amendment
• Officers cannot lawfully order you to stop recording or confiscate your device without a warrant
• Body camera adoption varies by department — Wyoming's small departments may have limited resources for cameras
• Wyoming has limited civilian oversight