Last Updated: January 2026 | Verified against current Florida Statutes Quick Answer Florida is a strict two-party consent state. Under Florida Statute § 934.03, it is illegal to intercept, record, or disclose any wire, oral, or electronic communication without the consent of all parties to the communication. Violations are third-degree felonies punishable by up to … Read more
List of Two Party Consent States (All Party Consent) *RecordingLaw.com prefers to err on the side of caution with these states as they have special provisions. Make sure to read the state rules, for a short summary view the chart below, to read more in-depth analysis click through to the specific page. What is a … Read more
Dark blue states require all-party consent for recording Last Updated: January 2026 | Verified against current state statutes Quick Answer: What Are the Two-Party Consent States? Technology has made it easier than ever to record someone, but although it may be simple…it’s not always legal. In the United States, 11 states have some form of … Read more
Last Updated: January 2026 | Verified against current Oregon Revised Statutes and recent case law Quick Answer Oregon’s recording laws are complex and recently changed. For telephone calls, Oregon follows one-party consent – you can record calls you’re part of. For in-person conversations, a 2023 federal court ruling (Project Veritas v. Schmidt) struck down Oregon’s … Read more
Last Updated: January 2026 | Verified against current Michigan Compiled Laws Quick Answer Michigan has one of the most legally ambiguous recording laws in the country. The statute (MCL 750.539c) technically requires all-party consent, but Michigan courts have interpreted it to allow participant recording without consent from others. This means if you’re a party to … Read more
Last Updated: January 2026 | Verified against current Delaware Code Quick Answer Delaware has conflicting recording laws that create legal ambiguity. The state’s wiretapping law (11 Del. C. § 2402) allows recording with one-party consent, but the privacy law (11 Del. C. § 1335) requires all-party consent. Because of this conflict, Delaware is generally treated … Read more
Last Updated: January 2026 | Verified against current Revised Code of Washington Quick Answer Washington is a two-party consent state. Under RCW 9.73.030, it is unlawful to intercept or record any private communication or conversation without consent from all parties. Consent can be satisfied by announcing that recording is occurring. Violations are a gross misdemeanor … Read more
Last Updated: January 2026 | Verified against current Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes Quick Answer Pennsylvania is a strict two-party consent state. Under 18 Pa.C.S. § 5703, it is a third-degree felony to intentionally intercept, disclose, or use wire, electronic, or oral communications without consent from all parties. Civil damages include $100 per day or $1,000 minimum … Read more
Last Updated: January 2026 | Verified against current New Hampshire Revised Statutes Quick Answer New Hampshire is an all-party consent state. Under RSA 570-A:2, it is a Class B felony to intercept telecommunications or oral communications without consent from all parties. There is no one-party consent exception for private parties. Victims can sue for civil … Read more
Last Updated: January 2026 | Verified against current Illinois Compiled Statutes Quick Answer Illinois is an all-party consent state for recording private conversations. Under 720 ILCS 5/14-2, you must have consent from all parties before recording any private conversation or electronic communication. However, Illinois law only protects “private” conversations where parties have a reasonable expectation … Read more