Recording Consent Laws by State (2026)
How each state handles recording conversations (one-party consent) and the penalties, from each state's code.
| State | Recording conversations (one-party consent) |
|---|---|
| Alabama | Alabama is a one-party consent state: the eavesdropping law makes it a crime to overhear, record, amplify or transmit a private communication of others without the consent of at least one of the people in the conversation. Criminal eavesdropping (intentionally using a device to eavesdrop) is a Class A misdemeanor (up to 1 year). Knowingly or recklessly using or divulging information obtained by criminal eavesdropping or surveillance is a Class B misdemeanor. Ala. Code 1975 §§ 13A-11-30(1), 13A-11-31, 13A-11-35; class ranges § 13A-5-7 |
| Alaska | Alaska is a one-party consent state. The eavesdropping law forbids using a device to hear or record an oral conversation, in person, by telephone or otherwise, without the consent of a party to the conversation, so a participant may record their own conversation. Someone who is not authorized by a party may not intercept a private communication or disclose its contents, and no one may use or publish information they know was obtained by illegal eavesdropping. A violation is a class A misdemeanor (up to 1 year and $25,000). AS 42.20.300, 42.20.310, 42.20.330; AS 12.55.035, 12.55.125, 12.55.135 |
| Arizona | Arizona is a one-party consent state. Intentionally intercepting a phone or electronic communication you are not part of, or a conversation where you are not present, without the consent of a party is a class 5 felony (0.75 / 1.5 / 2 years for a first offense). The law exempts interception with the consent of a party to the communication or a person present during it, so a participant may record their own calls and conversations. A.R.S. §§ 13-3005, 13-3012(9) |
| Arkansas | Arkansas is a one-party consent state. It is unlawful to intercept or record a phone, landline, wireless or in-person (oral) communication unless the person is a party to the communication or one of the parties has given prior consent. A violation is a Class A misdemeanor (up to 1 year). Ark. Code Ann. § 5-60-120 |
| California | California is an all-party consent state. Intentionally recording or eavesdropping on a confidential communication, in person or by phone, without the consent of all parties is punishable by a fine up to $2,500 per violation and/or up to 1 year in county jail or state prison, so it can be charged as a misdemeanor or felony; with a prior conviction the fine rises to $10,000. Intercepting and intentionally recording a call involving a cell phone or cordless phone without all parties' consent carries the same penalties. A 'confidential communication' is one where a party reasonably expects it is not being overheard or recorded. Cal. Pen. Code 632, 632.7; Pen. Code 17, 18, 19, 1170(h) |
| Colorado | Colorado is a one-party consent state. Wiretapping (recording or listening to a phone or electronic communication by someone who is not a sender or receiver, without the consent of either a sender or a receiver) is a class 2 misdemeanor. Eavesdropping (a person not visibly present who overhears or records a conversation without the consent of at least one of the principal parties) is also a class 2 misdemeanor (up to 120 days and $750). Using or disclosing illegally obtained contents is part of each offense. C.R.S. §§ 18-9-303, 18-9-304 |
| Connecticut | Connecticut has two rules. Under the criminal eavesdropping law, recording or overhearing a conversation is a crime only when done without the consent of at least one party by someone not present (or, for a phone call, by someone who is not the sender or receiver), so one-party consent avoids the crime; unlawful eavesdropping is a class D felony (up to 5 years). Separately, a civil law requires the consent of all parties before recording a private telephone call, unless a recorded warning is given at the start or an automatic beep tone sounds about every 15 seconds; a person recorded in violation can sue for damages, costs and attorney's fees. Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 53a-187, 53a-189, 52-570d |
| Delaware | Delaware is a one-party consent state for criminal purposes. Intentionally intercepting a phone call, electronic communication or private in-person conversation is a class E felony (up to 5 years) with a fine of up to $10,000, but it is lawful to record when you are a party to the communication or one party has given prior consent, unless the recording is made to commit a criminal or tortious act. 'Oral communication' covers in-person talk made with a justified expectation that it will not be intercepted. 11 Del. C. §§ 2401(13), 2402(a), (b), (c)(4) |
| District of Columbia | D.C. is a one-party consent jurisdiction. Willfully intercepting a phone call or private conversation is punishable by up to 5 years and a fine, but it is not unlawful for a person who is a party to the communication, or who has the prior consent of one party, to record it, unless the recording is made to commit a criminal, tortious or other injurious act. D.C. Code § 23-542(a), (b)(3) |
| Florida | Florida is an all-party consent state. Intercepting or recording a phone call, electronic communication or private in-person conversation is lawful only when all parties have given prior consent (with narrow exceptions, such as police investigations and emergency lines). Unlawful interception is a third-degree felony (up to 5 years), with lesser penalties for some first-offense radio interceptions. Fla. Stat. § 934.03(2)(d), (4) |
| Georgia | Georgia is a one-party consent state. It is a crime to secretly overhear, record or intercept another person's private conversation or communication, but a person who is a party to the conversation, or who has the prior consent of one party, may record it. Recording or photographing someone's activities in a private place out of public view requires the consent of everyone observed. A violation is a felony punishable by 1 to 5 years, a fine of up to $10,000, or both. Parents may monitor a minor child's communications in the family home for the child's welfare. O.C.G.A. §§ 16-11-62, 16-11-66, 16-11-69 |
| Hawaii | Hawaii is generally a one-party consent state. Intercepting a phone call, electronic communication or oral conversation is a class C felony (5 years), but a person who is a party to the communication, or who has the prior consent of one party, may record it unless the purpose is to commit a criminal or tortious act. The statute separately requires the consent of the people entitled to privacy before a recording device is installed in a private place. Haw. Rev. Stat. § 803-42(a), (b)(3) |
| Idaho | Idaho is a one-party consent state: it is lawful to record a phone call, electronic communication or in-person conversation if one of the parties to it (including the person recording) has given prior consent, unless it is done to commit a crime. Willfully intercepting a wire, electronic or oral communication without such consent, or knowingly disclosing or using contents obtained that way, is a felony punishable by up to 5 years in prison and/or a $5,000 fine. Idaho Code § 18-6702(1), (2)(d)-(e) |
| Illinois | Illinois requires the consent of all parties to record a private conversation in a surreptitious (secret) way. It is eavesdropping to secretly record or transmit a private conversation you are part of without all other parties' consent, to secretly overhear or record one you are not part of, to secretly intercept a private electronic communication, or to use or disclose information obtained that way. A 'private conversation' is an oral communication, in person or by phone or other means, that a party intended to be private in circumstances reasonably justifying that expectation. Eavesdropping is a Class 4 felony (1 to 3 years) for a first offense and a Class 3 felony (2 to 5 years) after that; recording a police officer, prosecutor or judge performing official duties without authorization is a Class 3 felony (Class 2 for a repeat). 720 ILCS 5/14-1(d), (g), 5/14-2(a), 5/14-4; 730 ILCS 5/5-4.5-25 to -65 |
| Indiana | Indiana is a one-party consent state for electronic communications: 'interception' means intentionally recording or acquiring the contents of an electronic communication by someone who is not a sender or receiver, without the consent of the sender or receiver. 'Electronic communication' covers any transfer of signs, signals, writing, images, sounds, data or oral communication transmitted in whole or in part by wire, radio or electronic means, such as a phone call. Unlawful interception is a Level 5 felony (1 to 6 years), and civil damages are also available. The statute's definitions are written for transmitted communications; it does not separately address recording an in-person conversation that is not transmitted. IC 35-31.5-2-176, 35-31.5-2-110, 35-33.5-5-5, 35-33.5-5-4; IC 35-50-2-4 to -7, 35-50-3-2 to -4 |
| Iowa | Iowa is a one-party consent state. A person who is a party to a phone call, electronic communication or in-person conversation, or who has the consent of one party, may record it, unless it is done to commit a crime, a tort or another injurious act. Willfully intercepting a wire, oral or electronic communication without that consent, or knowingly disclosing or using its contents, is a class D felony (up to 5 years). A separate eavesdropping law makes it a serious misdemeanor (up to 1 year) to tap a line or record a conversation without right, but it does not apply to a sender or recipient, or someone openly present and taking part. Iowa Code §§ 808B.2(1), (2)(c), 727.8 (Iowa Code 2026) |
| Kansas | Kansas is a one-party consent state: its breach of privacy law makes it a crime to intercept a phone call or other private communication 'without the consent of the sender or receiver,' so a participant may record, or one party may consent. Intercepting communications without any party's consent, divulging illegally intercepted messages, or secretly using a device to hear or record sounds inside a private place without the consent of the people entitled to privacy there, is breach of privacy, a class A nonperson misdemeanor (up to 1 year and $2,500). K.S.A. 21-6101(a)(1)-(5), (b)(1) |
| Kentucky | Kentucky is a one-party consent state: 'eavesdropping' means using a device to overhear, record, amplify or transmit a phone or in-person conversation of others without the consent of at least one party, so a participant may record or one party may consent. Intentionally using a device to eavesdrop, whether or not the person is present, is a Class D felony (1 to 5 years). KRS 526.010, 526.020, 532.060 |
| Louisiana | Louisiana is a one-party consent state: a person not acting under color of law may record a phone call or in-person conversation if he or she is a party to it, or if one of the parties has given prior consent, unless the recording is made to commit a criminal or tortious act. Willfully intercepting a wire, electronic or oral communication without that consent, or using or disclosing an illegally intercepted communication, carries a fine up to $10,000 and 2 to 10 years at hard labor. La. R.S. 15:1303(A)-(C) |
| Maine | Maine is a one-party consent state. Its wiretap law defines 'intercept' to exclude recording by the sender or receiver of the communication or by a person given prior authority by the sender or receiver, so a participant may record a phone call or in-person conversation, or authorize someone else to. Intercepting a wire or oral communication without that consent, or disclosing or using its contents knowing it was illegally intercepted, is a Class C crime (up to 5 years and $5,000). 15 M.R.S. §§ 709(4), 710(1), (3) |
| Maryland | Maryland is an all-party consent state: it is lawful to record a phone call or private conversation only when all parties to it have given prior consent, unless an exception applies. Willfully intercepting a wire, oral or electronic communication without that consent, or knowingly disclosing or using an illegally intercepted communication, is a felony punishable by up to 5 years and/or a $10,000 fine. Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 10-402(a)-(c) |
| Massachusetts | Massachusetts is an all-party consent state: its wiretap law defines an illegal interception as secretly hearing or secretly recording a wire or oral communication with a device, unless the person has prior authority from all parties to the communication. Willfully intercepting (or trying to intercept) a wire or oral communication is punishable by a fine up to $10,000, up to 5 years in state prison or 2.5 years in a jail or house of correction, or both. Because the law covers secret recording, open recording that all parties know about is not an interception. G.L. c. 272, § 99(B)(4), (C)(1) |
| Michigan | Michigan's eavesdropping law makes it a felony, punishable by up to 2 years and/or a $2,000 fine, for anyone present or not present during a private conversation to willfully use a device to eavesdrop on it without the consent of all parties. The statute defines eavesdropping as overhearing, recording, amplifying or transmitting the private discourse 'of others' without the permission of all persons engaged in it; whether a participant may record his or her own conversation without the others' consent is not stated in the statute and depends on court interpretation. MCL 750.539a(2); MCL 750.539c |
| Minnesota | Minnesota is a one-party consent state: a person not acting under color of law may record a phone call or conversation if he or she is a party to it or one party has given prior consent, unless the recording is made to commit a criminal or tortious act. Intentionally intercepting a wire, electronic or oral communication without that consent is punishable by a fine up to $20,000, up to 5 years in prison, or both, with lower penalties for certain first offenses not done for an illegal or commercial purpose. Minn. Stat. § 626A.02, subds. 1, 2(d), 4 |
| Mississippi | Mississippi is a one-party consent state: its wiretap law does not apply when a private person is a party to the communication or one of the parties has given prior consent, unless the recording is made to commit a criminal, tortious or other injurious act. Knowingly possessing, installing, operating or monitoring a device in violation of the law is a misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in county jail, a fine of up to $10,000, or both. Miss. Code Ann. §§ 41-29-531(e), 41-29-533(1) |
| Missouri | Missouri is a one-party consent state: it is not illegal for a person who is a party to a phone call, or who has the prior consent of one party, to intercept or record it, unless it is done to commit a criminal or tortious act. Illegally intercepting a wire communication, or using certain devices to intercept an oral communication, or knowingly disclosing or using illegally intercepted contents, is a class E felony (up to 4 years). RSMo § 542.402.1, 2(3) |
| Montana | Montana requires the knowledge of all parties: it is a crime (violating privacy in communications) to record a conversation with a hidden device without the knowledge of everyone in the conversation, and to purposely intercept an electronic communication. Recording is allowed if the people are warned (if one person gives the warning, either party may record), at public meetings, and by public officials doing official duties. A first conviction carries up to 6 months in county jail, a fine of up to $500, or both. MCA § 45-8-213(1)(c), (2)(a), (3), (4)(a) |
| Nebraska | Nebraska is a one-party consent state: it is not unlawful for a person who is a party to a phone, electronic or in-person conversation, or who has the prior consent of one party, to intercept or record it, unless it is done to commit a criminal or tortious act. Otherwise, intentionally intercepting such a communication, or knowingly disclosing or using illegally intercepted contents, is a Class IV felony (up to 2 years). Neb. Rev. Stat. § 86-290(1), (2)(c) |
| Nevada | Nevada's rules differ by type of conversation. For in-person private conversations it is one-party: secretly recording is illegal unless one of the people in the conversation authorizes it. For phone calls (wire communications) the statute allows interception only with the prior consent of one party and an emergency in which a court order cannot practically be obtained (subject to later court ratification), so a call cannot lawfully be recorded on one party's consent alone. Willfully intercepting wire or oral communications in violation of these rules is a category D felony (1 to 4 years and up to $5,000). NRS 200.620(1), 200.650, 200.690 |
| New Hampshire | New Hampshire is an all-party consent state: intercepting or recording a phone call or in-person (oral) conversation without the consent of all parties is a class B felony (up to 7 years), as is disclosing or using the contents of an illegal interception. A person who is a party to the conversation, or who has one party's consent, but records without everyone's consent commits a misdemeanor. RSA 570-A:2, I, I-a |
| New Jersey | One-party consent. A person who is a party to a phone, electronic or in-person conversation, or who has the prior consent of one party, may record it, unless it is done to commit a criminal, tortious or other injurious act. Being the subscriber to a phone line does not give consent to record calls among other people on it. Purposely intercepting a wire, electronic or oral communication without that consent, or knowingly disclosing or using an illegally intercepted one, is a crime of the third degree (3-5 years, up to $15,000). A person whose communication is unlawfully intercepted may also sue for damages. N.J.S.A. 2A:156A-3, 2A:156A-4(d); N.J.S. 2C:43-3, 2C:43-6 |
| New Mexico | For telephone and telegraph communications, New Mexico follows one-party consent: interference with communications includes reading, interrupting, taking or copying a message or communication meant for another without the consent of a sender or intended recipient, and tapping a phone line without the owner's consent; it does not apply to a person acting under color of law who is a party to the communication or has one party's prior consent. Interference with communications is a misdemeanor (less than 1 year). The statute is written for telegraph and telephone communications and does not separately address recording an in-person conversation. NMSA 1978, 30-12-1; NMSA 1978, 31-18-15, 31-19-1 |
| New York | One-party consent. Eavesdropping, a class E felony (up to 4 years), means unlawfully wiretapping, mechanically overhearing a conversation, or intercepting or accessing an electronic communication. Wiretapping is defined as recording a phone call by someone who is not a sender or receiver and without the consent of either; mechanical overhearing is recording an in-person conversation by someone not present and without the consent of at least one party. So a participant in a call or conversation, or someone with one party's consent, may record it. N.Y. Penal Law 250.00(1)-(2), 250.05; 70.00 |
| North Carolina | One-party consent. Willfully intercepting a wire, oral or electronic communication without the consent of at least one party to it, or disclosing or using one knowing it was unlawfully intercepted, is a Class H felony. So a participant in a phone call or in-person conversation, or someone with one participant's consent, may record it. N.C. Gen. Stat. 15A-287(a); 15A-1340.17 |
| North Dakota | One-party consent. Intentionally intercepting a wire (phone) or oral communication with a device, or disclosing or using the contents knowing they were intercepted, is a class C felony (up to 5 years). It is a defense if the person was a party to the communication or one party gave prior consent, unless the recording was made to commit a crime or other unlawful harm. Secretly loitering around a building to overhear and repeat conversations in order to vex, annoy or injure others is a class A misdemeanor. N.D.C.C. 12.1-15-02; 12.1-32-01 |
| Ohio | One-party consent. Purposely intercepting a wire (phone), oral or electronic communication, or using the contents knowing they were illegally intercepted, is a fourth-degree felony (6-18 months). The ban does not apply to a person (not a police officer) who is a party to the communication or has one party's prior consent, as long as the recording is not made to commit a crime, a tort or another injurious act. R.C. 2933.52(A), (B)(4), (C); 2929.14 |
| Oklahoma | Oklahoma is a one-party consent state. Under the Security of Communications Act, it is not unlawful for a person to record a phone call or in-person conversation when that person is a party to it or one party has given prior consent, unless the recording is made to commit a crime. Willfully intercepting a wire, oral or electronic communication without that consent, or disclosing or using illegally intercepted contents, is a Class D1 felony punishable by up to 5 years, a fine of at least $5,000, or both. 13 O.S. §§ 176.3, 176.4(5); 21 O.S. § 20N |
| Oregon | Oregon has different rules for phone calls and in-person talks. For phone and other telecommunications, recording is allowed if at least one participant consents (one-party consent). For in-person conversations, a person may not record with a device unless all participants are specifically told the conversation is being recorded, with exceptions such as recording during a felony that endangers human life, openly recording on-duty police in public, and unconcealed recording of public meetings, classes or events. Violations, including using or divulging an unlawfully obtained conversation, are a Class A misdemeanor (up to 364 days). ORS 165.540(1), (5), (6), (9) |
| Pennsylvania | Pennsylvania is an all-party consent state. Under the Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act, intercepting, disclosing or using a phone call, electronic communication or in-person (oral) conversation is a felony of the third degree (up to 7 years) unless an exception applies, and the general consent exception requires that all parties gave prior consent. An in-person conversation is protected only when the speaker had a justified expectation that it would not be intercepted. Narrow exceptions allow one-party consent for law enforcement with prosecutor approval and for certain customer-service monitoring. 18 Pa.C.S. §§ 5702, 5703, 5704(2)(ii), (4), (15) |
| Rhode Island | Rhode Island is a one-party consent state. It is not unlawful for a person who is a party to a phone call, electronic communication or in-person conversation, or who has the prior consent of one party, to record it, unless the recording is made to commit a crime or tort. Willfully intercepting, disclosing or using a communication in violation of the law is punishable by up to 5 years in prison. R.I. Gen. Laws § 11-35-21(a), (c)(3) |
| South Carolina | South Carolina is a one-party consent state. A person not acting for the government may record a phone call, electronic communication or in-person conversation if the person is a party to it or one party gave prior consent. Intentionally intercepting a communication otherwise is a felony punishable by up to 5 years in prison or a fine up to $5,000. S.C. Code §§ 17-30-20, 17-30-30(C), 17-30-50 |
| South Dakota | South Dakota is a one-party consent state. It is a Class 5 felony (up to 5 years) to use an eavesdropping device to overhear or record a phone or other communication without the consent of either the sender or receiver, or an in-person conversation without the consent of a party to it, unless the person is a party. Secretly recording or listening to jury deliberations is also a Class 5 felony. SDCL 23A-35A-20 |
| Tennessee | One-party consent. It is lawful for a person who is a party to a phone, in-person or electronic conversation, or who has one party's prior consent, to record it, unless it is done to commit a criminal or tortious act. Unlawfully intercepting a wire, oral or electronic communication is a Class D felony (2 to 12 years), and the person recorded may also sue. Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 39-13-601(b)(5), 39-13-602, 39-13-603; § 40-35-111 |
| Texas | One-party consent. It is a defense to the interception crime that the person recording is a party to the phone call or in-person conversation, or that one party gave prior consent, unless the recording is made to commit an unlawful act. Unlawfully intercepting a wire, oral or electronic communication is a second-degree felony (2 to 20 years). Tex. Penal Code § 16.02(c)(4), (f); § 12.33 |
| Utah | One-party consent. A person who is a party to a phone, electronic or in-person (oral) conversation, or who has prior consent from one party, may record it unless it is done to commit a criminal or tortious act. Unlawfully intercepting a communication is generally a third-degree felony (up to 5 years and a $5,000 fine), and the person recorded may sue. Utah Code § 77-23a-4(7)(b), (10); § 76-3-203 |
| Virginia | One-party consent. It is not a crime for a person to record a phone, electronic or in-person conversation if that person is a party to it or one of the parties gave prior consent. Otherwise, intentionally intercepting, using or disclosing a wire, electronic or oral communication is a Class 6 felony (1 to 5 years, or up to 12 months in jail and/or a $2,500 fine). Va. Code § 19.2-62(A), (B)(2); § 18.2-10 |
| Washington | All-party consent. It is unlawful to record or intercept a private phone call or a private in-person conversation without the consent of all participants; consent is treated as given if one party announces to everyone that the conversation is being recorded and the announcement is itself recorded. One-party consent is allowed for emergency calls and for calls conveying threats of extortion, blackmail or bodily harm, or that are anonymous, repeated or at very inconvenient hours. A violation is a gross misdemeanor (up to 364 days and/or $5,000). RCW 9.73.030, 9.73.080; RCW 9A.20.021 |
| West Virginia | One-party consent. It is lawful to record a phone call or an in-person conversation if you are a party to it or one party has given prior consent, unless the recording is made to commit a criminal or tortious act. Intercepting a wire, oral or electronic communication without that consent, or knowingly disclosing or using an illegally intercepted communication, is a felony punishable by up to 5 years, a fine up to $10,000, or both. A person whose communication is illegally intercepted may also sue for actual damages (at least $100 per day of violation), punitive damages and attorney fees. W. Va. Code §§ 62-1D-3(a), (b), (e), 62-1D-12 |
| Wisconsin | One-party consent. It is not unlawful for a person to record a phone call or an in-person (oral) conversation if the person is a party to it or one party has given prior consent, unless it is done to commit a criminal, tortious or other injurious act. Intercepting a wire, electronic or oral communication without that consent, or disclosing or using one known to be illegally intercepted, is a Class H felony: up to 6 years and/or $10,000. A person whose communication was illegally intercepted may sue for actual damages (at least $100 per day or $1,000, whichever is higher), punitive damages and attorney fees. Wis. Stat. §§ 968.31(1), (2)(c), (2m), 939.50(3) |
| Wyoming | One-party consent. A person may record a phone call or an in-person (oral) conversation if the person is a party to it or one party has given prior consent, unless it is recorded to commit a criminal or tortious act. Intentionally intercepting a wire, oral or electronic communication without that consent, or using or disclosing one known to be illegally intercepted, is a felony punishable by a fine up to $1,000, up to 5 years in prison, or both. Intercepting the radio portion of a cordless or cellular phone call or a paging communication is a misdemeanor (up to 6 months and/or $750). W.S. 7-3-702(a), (b)(iv), (f) |
General legal information, not legal advice. Laws change and local rules can differ; check the linked official source or talk to a lawyer about your situation.