EnglishEspañol
Recording LawsAlaska Laws flagAlaska Laws
Alaska flag

Alaska

Alaska Recording Laws (2026): One-Party Consent Rules

Independently fact-checkedEditor-reviewedLaw current as of August 15, 2026By Recording Law Editorial TeamReviewed August 26, 202612 min read

Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 15, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of August 15, 2026. · 25 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

Alaska Recording Laws (2026): One-Party Consent Rules

Alaska is a one-party consent state under AS 42.20.310. A participant in a conversation may record it without telling the other parties. The Alaska Supreme Court confirmed this in Palmer v. State, 604 P.2d 1106, 1108 n.5 (Alaska 1979). Recording by a non-participant is a Class A misdemeanor under AS 42.20.330 and a civil wrong.

Alaska recording law at a glance

QuestionAnswer
Consent ruleOne-party: a participant may record without telling others
Main statuteAS 42.20.310 (Title 42, not Title 11)
When recording is illegalA non-participant records without any party's consent
Criminal penaltyClass A misdemeanor: up to 1 year jail, up to $25,000 fine
Civil remedyNo state civil cause; use federal 18 U.S.C. 2520 or common-law tort
Hidden camerasAS 11.61.123: producing an image is a felony (Class C adult, Class B minor); viewing only is a Class A misdemeanor (adult) or Class C felony (minor)
Recording policeNinth Circuit First Amendment right; record openly in public

For the full legal framework, see Alaska recording laws in depth.

Recording in-person conversations in Alaska

Alaska's eavesdropping statute, AS 42.20.310, prohibits using an eavesdropping device to hear or record an oral conversation "without the consent of a party to the conversation." The phrase "a party" is the operative word: the Alaska Supreme Court held in Palmer v. State, 604 P.2d 1106, 1108 n.5 (Alaska 1979) that the statute reaches only third-party interception and does not apply to a participant. If you are in the conversation, you consent simply by being there.

The statute lives in Title 42 (Public Utilities and Carriers), not Title 11 (Criminal Law), a quirk of its 1966 enactment as a telephone-tampering provision. The controlling definition sits inside the section itself. AS 42.20.310(b) says that "in this section eavesdropping device means any device capable of being used to hear or record oral conversation whether the conversation is conducted in person, by telephone, or by any other means," with a single carve-out for devices used to restore deaf or hard-of-hearing people to normal or partial hearing. On its terms that reaches smartphones, wearables, and AI voice recorders. The article-wide definition at AS 42.20.390(3) is narrower: it applies only "unless the context otherwise requires," and it excludes telephone instruments and equipment furnished by a wire or electronic communication service provider in the ordinary course of business.

Two caveats apply. The one-party safe harbor disappears if the recording is made for a criminal or tortious purpose, under both federal 18 U.S.C. 2511(2)(d) and Alaska common law: documenting harassment for HR is lawful, recording to facilitate blackmail is not. And a pending Governor-sponsored bill, SB 85, would convert Alaska to all-party consent by replacing "a party" with "all parties." As of June 2026 it is stalled in Senate Labor and Commerce Committee with no action since its February 5, 2025 introduction.

Alaska small audio recorder and over-ear headphones resting on a stack of legal documents

Recording phone calls in Alaska

The one-party rule applies equally to telephone, cell, and VoIP calls. If you are on the call, you may record it under AS 42.20.310 and the federal one-party floor at 18 U.S.C. 2511(2)(d). The electronic-communication definition in AS 42.20.390 expressly covers cellular and cordless telephone communications.

Cross-border calls require care. If any party sits in California (Cal. Penal Code 632), Washington (RCW 9.73.030), or Oregon (ORS 165.540), those states require all-party consent. Courts generally apply the stricter rule, so the safest approach is to announce the recording to all parties at the start. Our recording consent checker can confirm which rule governs a call that reaches into California, Washington, or Oregon. Canadian calls are generally one-party under Criminal Code s. 184, though provincial privacy torts vary.

For more detail, see Alaska phone call recording laws.

Hidden cameras, doorbells, and nanny cams

Recording audio or video on your own property in ordinary living spaces is generally lawful under AS 42.20.310 and the First Amendment. The limit is places where someone has a reasonable expectation of privacy.

AS 11.61.123 makes it a crime to view or photograph the private exposure of the genitals, anus, or female breast of another person in a place where they reasonably expected not to be observed, such as bathrooms, locker rooms, and dressing rooms. "Picture" is defined to include electronic and digital formats, so smartphone cameras and smart-home devices are fully covered.

Penalty grades under AS 11.61.123:

  • Adult victim, viewing prong (no image produced): Class A misdemeanor (up to 1 year jail, up to $25,000 fine)
  • Adult victim, production prong: Class C felony (up to 5 years, up to $50,000 fine)
  • Minor victim, viewing prong: Class C felony (up to 5 years)
  • Minor victim, production prong: Class B felony (up to 10 years)

AS 11.61.123(d) provides an affirmative defense with three elements that must all be satisfied: the viewing or production was conducted as a security surveillance system, notice of the viewing or production was posted, and any viewing or use of the pictures produced is done only in the interest of crime prevention or prosecution. A nanny cam that captures audio conversations without any participant consenting is separately governed by AS 42.20.310, since the camera is then acting as an eavesdropping device.

For the full nonconsensual intimate imagery framework, see Alaska voyeurism and hidden camera laws and Alaska security camera laws.

Alaska two office chairs angled toward each other beside a window with a small voice recorder on the side table

Penalties for illegal recording in Alaska

Criminal penalties are set in AS 42.20.330, which grades every violation of AS 42.20.300 or AS 42.20.310 as a Class A misdemeanor. Sentencing and fines are governed by AS 12.55.135(a) and AS 12.55.035(b)(5). The $1,000 fine figure in some older summaries is stale.

StatuteConductGradeJailFine
AS 42.20.310 via AS 42.20.330Eavesdropping / illegal recordingClass A misd1 year$25,000
AS 42.20.300 via AS 42.20.330Unauthorized publicationClass A misd1 year$25,000
AS 11.61.123 (adult, viewing only)Indecent viewing of an adultClass A misd1 year$25,000
AS 11.61.123 (adult, production)Producing a picture of an adultClass C felony5 years$50,000
AS 11.61.123 (minor, viewing)Indecent viewing of a minorClass C felony5 years$50,000
AS 11.61.123 (minor, production)Production of a picture of a minorClass B felony10 years$100,000
AS 11.61.120(a)(6),(8)Adult NCII distribution (harassment 2nd)Class B misd90 days$2,000
18 U.S.C. 2511Federal Wiretap ActFederal felony5 yearsFederal guidelines

Civil remedies are not created by AS 42.20, which contains no express private cause of action. Victims have two routes. First, the federal ECPA civil action at 18 U.S.C. 2520 provides the greater of actual damages plus profits or statutory damages of at least $10,000 (or $100 per day), plus punitive damages and attorney fees, with a two-year statute of limitations. Second, the Alaska common-law intrusion-upon-seclusion tort (Restatement (Second) of Torts s. 652B), reinforced by Alaska Constitution Article I, Section 22, supports actual damages, emotional-distress recovery, and punitive damages under a two-year limitations period (AS 09.10.070).

Alaska separately criminalizes publishing or divulging an illegally obtained recording, not just making it. Under AS 42.20.300, a person who receives a private communication and knows or reasonably should know it was obtained through an illegal interception may not divulge, publish, or use it, even without any role in the original recording. AS 42.20.330 grades this the same as the underlying eavesdropping violation: a Class A misdemeanor.

A narrow First Amendment safe harbor applies to a third party, such as a journalist, who played no part in the illegal interception, lawfully obtained access to the recording, and is publishing a matter of public concern. Bartnicki v. Vopper, 532 U.S. 514 (2001) protected a radio host who broadcast an illegally intercepted union-negotiation call he had no hand in intercepting. The safe harbor does not extend to whoever made the illegal recording in the first place.

Recording the police in Alaska

Alaska sits in the Ninth Circuit, which clearly establishes a First Amendment right to record law enforcement officers performing official duties in public. The governing rule comes from Askins v. DHS, 899 F.3d 1035, 1044 (9th Cir. 2018): "The First Amendment protects the right to photograph and record matters of public interest. This includes the right to record law enforcement officers engaged in the exercise of their official duties in public places." The foundational case is Fordyce v. City of Seattle, 55 F.3d 436 (9th Cir. 1995), which reversed summary judgment for a Seattle officer who allegedly smashed a videographer's camera during a public protest.

These decisions bind the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska and inform qualified-immunity analysis for Alaska officers under 42 U.S.C. 1983. Record openly, stand at a reasonable distance, and do not physically interfere with police operations. The Ninth Circuit right does not protect a recorder from a separate trespass or obstruction charge.

Note the constitutional overlay that runs the other direction: under State v. Glass, 583 P.2d 872 (Alaska 1978), Alaska police must obtain a search warrant before electronically monitoring a private conversation, even when one party consents. Alaska is therefore a hybrid jurisdiction: one-party for private civilian recording, warrant-required for police informant recording. The Alaska Court of Appeals reaffirmed Glass in Cleveland v. State (Alaska Ct. App. 2020), holding that the warrant must state with reasonable specificity the time, subject matter, and parties to the anticipated conversation.

For more detail, see Alaska laws on recording police.

Alaska dome security camera in the corner of an office ceiling, soft interior daylight

Special topics in Alaska

SB 85 of the 34th Alaska Legislature is Governor Mike Dunleavy's bill replacing "a party" with "all parties" in AS 42.20.310(a)(1) to convert Alaska to all-party consent. It would also add peace-officer exemptions at proposed AS 42.20.320(8) and (9), letting police record civilians without consent during investigations while civilians lose the safe harbor for recording officers, an asymmetry the ACLU of Alaska flagged as a one-way accountability ratchet. Introduced February 5, 2025, it remains in Senate Labor and Commerce Committee with no action since. The 34th Legislature sunsets in early 2027; Alaska remains a one-party state under current law.

AI deepfakes and HB 47 (pending)

Alaska has no enacted deepfake criminal statute as of June 2026. HB 47 passed the House 39-0 on February 27, 2026 and sits in Senate Judiciary. As introduced it would have criminalized distribution of a forged digital likeness (an AI clone used to defraud, harass, or intimidate) as a misdemeanor, alongside distribution of a generated sexual depiction and AI-generated CSAM. Senate Community and Regional Affairs stripped the forged-digital-likeness provision along with the social-media restrictions and the $1 million per-occurrence AI-company civil penalty in its April 2026 committee substitute, citing First Amendment and single-subject concerns. The bill as currently pending in Senate Judiciary is retitled around generated child sexual abuse material and no longer touches AI-clone impersonation; it covers possession and distribution of generated CSAM, enticement of a minor, and unlawful exploitation of a minor. Two companion bills are also pending in the 34th Legislature: SB 2 (election deepfakes; requires disclosure on election-related synthetic media and creates a civil cause of action) and SB 33 (synthetic-media defamation per se), both heard and held in Senate State Affairs Committee on April 29, 2025. The federal TAKE IT DOWN Act, Pub. L. 119-12 (signed May 19, 2025) already covers nonconsensual intimate visual depictions including AI forgeries, with a 48-hour platform notice-and-removal window effective May 19, 2026.

Body-worn cameras

Alaska has no statewide body-worn camera statute; the framework is policy-based. DPS Operations and Procedures Manual Chapter 241 (effective May 1, 2023) governs State Troopers, Wildlife Troopers, Court Services Officers, Fire Marshal investigators, and Village Public Safety Officers; recordings are retained 26 months or until litigation resolves and are public records under the Alaska Public Records Act (AS 40.25.110), subject to the law-enforcement exemption at AS 40.25.120(a)(6). In Anchorage, AO 2024-69 (adopted July 31, 2024) codified APD body-camera policy, requiring release of officer-involved-shooting footage within 45 days and family viewing within 14 days.

Workplace recording and the NLRA

Under AS 42.20.310 and federal one-party consent, an employer or employee who is a party to a workplace conversation may lawfully record it. Blanket no-recording handbook rules are a separate question governed by Stericycle, Inc., 372 NLRB No. 113 (Aug. 2, 2023): such rules are presumptively unlawful if they tend to chill Section 7 activity, unless the employer shows a substantial legitimate interest and no narrower alternative. NLRB GC 25-05 (Feb. 14, 2025) rescinded prior guidance memos for backlog reasons but did not overrule Stericycle, and NLRB GC 25-07 (June 25, 2025) narrowly bars surreptitious recording of collective-bargaining sessions. See Alaska workplace recording laws.

Federal overlay: ECPA, Open Meetings, and cross-topic laws

The Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2522, sets the federal floor and supplies the principal civil remedy (18 U.S.C. 2520) for Alaska plaintiffs. FCC Declaratory Ruling 24-17 (Feb. 8, 2024) treats AI-generated voices in robocalls as "artificial or prerecorded voice" under the TCPA, requiring prior express consent. The Alaska Open Meetings Act (AS 44.62.310) opens most state and local public-body meetings to the public, where attendees may generally record subject to reasonable anti-disruption rules.

  • February 5, 2025: Governor Dunleavy introduces SB 85, the all-party consent conversion bill, in the 34th Legislature. Bill stalls in Senate Labor and Commerce Committee.
  • February 27, 2026: HB 47 (deepfake/AI CSAM bill) passes Alaska House 39-0; referred to Senate.
  • April 9-10, 2026: Senate CRA committee strips the forged-digital-likeness, social-media, and $1M AI-company provisions from HB 47; bill referred to Senate Judiciary.
  • May 19, 2025: Federal TAKE IT DOWN Act signed; platform takedown duty effective May 19, 2026.
  • May 19, 2026: TAKE IT DOWN Act covered-platform 48-hour notice-and-removal window takes effect.

Alaska recording laws in depth

By type of recording

By place or relationship

Alaska wooden gavel on a sound block on a judge bench

More Alaska laws

This article is general legal information, not legal advice. Recording laws change and apply differently to each situation. For advice about your situation, consult a licensed Alaska attorney.

More Alaska Laws

Frequently Asked Questions

Is Alaska a one-party or two-party consent state?

Alaska is a one-party consent state under AS 42.20.310. If you are a participant in a conversation, you may record it without telling the other parties, per Palmer v. State, 604 P.2d 1106, 1108 n.5 (Alaska 1979). A pending bill, SB 85, would convert Alaska to all-party consent, but as of June 2026 it is stalled in Senate Labor and Commerce Committee with no committee action since its February 5, 2025 introduction.

Can I record a phone call in Alaska?

Yes, if you are a party to the call. AS 42.20.310 and the federal one-party rule at 18 U.S.C. 2511(2)(d) both permit a participant to record. If any other party is in California, Washington, or Oregon, those states require all-party consent, so the safest practice is to announce the recording before substantive discussion begins on any cross-border call.

Is illegal recording a felony or misdemeanor in Alaska?

Recording a conversation as a non-participant is a Class A misdemeanor under AS 42.20.330, carrying up to one year in jail and up to a $25,000 fine. Alaska's hidden-camera statute, AS 11.61.123, already grades producing an image of an adult victim as a Class C felony (only unrecorded viewing of an adult is a Class A misdemeanor), and escalates a tier further, to a Class C felony (viewing) or Class B felony (production), when the victim is a minor. Federal Wiretap Act violations carry up to five years imprisonment.

What can I sue for if someone illegally recorded me in Alaska?

Alaska has no express state civil cause of action for illegal recording. Your two options are the federal ECPA civil action at 18 U.S.C. 2520, which provides the greater of actual damages or $10,000 in statutory damages plus punitive damages and attorney fees, and the Alaska common-law intrusion-upon-seclusion tort, which supports actual damages, emotional distress, and punitives. Both have a two-year limitations period.

Are Ring doorbells and nanny cams legal in Alaska?

Yes, for areas where people have no reasonable expectation of privacy, such as your front porch or driveway. Placing a camera in a bathroom, locker room, or anywhere a person reasonably expects not to be observed violates AS 11.61.123. Producing an image of an adult that way is a Class C felony (a Class B felony if the person shown is a minor); merely viewing without recording is a Class A misdemeanor for an adult victim. A nanny cam that also captures audio conversations without any participant present crosses into AS 42.20.310 territory.

Can I record my boss or an HR meeting in Alaska?

Yes, under AS 42.20.310 as a participant in the conversation, and under the federal one-party rule at 18 U.S.C. 2511(2)(d). Review your employer's handbook first: a properly tailored no-recording policy can support discipline even where recording is technically lawful. NLRB Stericycle (2023) makes blanket no-recording rules presumptively unlawful, but a narrowly justified policy may survive.

Can I record police officers in Alaska?

Yes, openly in public. Fordyce v. City of Seattle, 55 F.3d 436 (9th Cir. 1995) and Askins v. DHS, 899 F.3d 1035, 1044 (9th Cir. 2018) clearly establish a First Amendment right to record officers performing official duties in public places. Note that under State v. Glass, 583 P.2d 872 (Alaska 1978), the same right does not run the other way: Alaska police need a warrant before electronically monitoring a private conversation, even with one party's consent.

Does Alaska have a deepfake law?

Not yet as of June 2026. HB 47, which as introduced would have criminalized distribution of AI-generated sexual depictions and forged digital likenesses, passed the Alaska House in February 2026 and now sits in Senate Judiciary. Its Senate committee substitute dropped the forged-digital-likeness provision in April 2026, so the bill as currently pending covers generated CSAM, enticement of a minor, and unlawful exploitation of a minor, not AI-clone impersonation. The federal TAKE IT DOWN Act (signed May 19, 2025) already provides federal criminal and platform-takedown protections for nonconsensual intimate imagery including AI-generated forgeries.

Updates

Corrected the Alaska hidden-camera affirmative defense (AS 11.61.123(d) has no same-sex monitoring element) and re-sourced the controlling "eavesdropping device" definition to AS 42.20.310(b) rather than the narrower article-wide definition in AS 42.20.390.

Corrected the AS 11.61.123 penalty description, which had understated producing a hidden-camera image of an adult as a misdemeanor when it is a Class C felony (only unrecorded viewing is a misdemeanor), and updated the HB 47 discussion to reflect the Senate committee's removal of the forged-digital-likeness provision.

Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes

Corrected a KeyTakeaways bullet that described the federal ECPA's $10,000 statutory-damages figure as a cap; 18 U.S.C. 2520 actually sets it as a floor (the greater of $100/day or $10,000), consistent with how the rest of the page already described it.

Governing law re-checked for recent changes

Reviewed and approved by an editor

Restructured into canonical template: added AEO lede, at-a-glance table, dedicated sections for in-person/phone/hidden-cameras/penalties/police/special-topics, in-depth index linking all 12 sub-pages, and expanded FAQ to 8 questions. Condensed special topics (SB 85, HB 47, body-worn cameras, workplace/NLRA, federal overlay) into tight subsections. Verified SB 85 still stalled in Senate Labor and Commerce as of June 2026. Confirmed HB 47 still pending in Senate Judiciary as of June 2026, not yet enacted; updated to reflect Senate CRA stripping of social-media and $1M AI-company provisions on April 9, 2026. Preserved all primary statute citations (AS 42.20.310, AS 42.20.330, AS 12.55.135, AS 12.55.035, AS 11.61.123, AS 11.61.120, AS 11.61.116), Palmer v. State, State v. Glass, Cleveland v. State, Fordyce, Askins, and federal overlays. Corrected fine cap from stale $1,000 to current $25,000 per AS 12.55.035(b)(5) preserved from prior audit. No statute or case-law corrections required: core one-party consent rule, Class A misdemeanor grade, and civil remedy framework all verified consistent with primary sources.

Refresh: Verified SB 85 status via akleg.gov on May 14, 2026 (introduced February 5, 2025; in Senate Labor and Commerce Committee with referral to Senate Judiciary; no committee action since the introduction; bill alive in the 34th Legislature). Added the Ninth Circuit record-the-police framing built on Fordyce v. City of Seattle, 55 F.3d 436 (9th Cir. 1995) and Askins v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 899 F.3d 1035, 1044 (9th Cir. 2018), decided August 14, 2018, with the operative pinpoint formulation preserved verbatim. Added the State v. Glass, 583 P.2d 872 (Alaska 1978) constitutional overlay and the Cleveland v. State (Alaska Ct. App. 2020) particularity standard reaffirming Glass; both cited via courts.alaska.gov and appellate-records.courts.alaska.gov to avoid the banlisted aggregator link the prior version used for Palmer. Reframed Alaska as a hybrid jurisdiction: one-party for private recording under Palmer, warrant-required for police informant recording under Glass. Surfaced HB 47 of the 34th Legislature (passed Alaska House 39-1 on February 27, 2026; in Senate Judiciary as of April 10, 2026) as the pending forged-digital-likeness and generated-sexual-depiction bill, with SB 2 and SB 33 also pending. Added the federal TAKE IT DOWN Act, Pub. L. 119-12 (signed May 19, 2025; covered-platform notice-and-takedown effective May 19, 2026) as the federal NCII and deepfake-NCII overlay. Added the DPS Operations and Procedures Manual Chapter 241 Mobile Audio and Video Recording (effective May 1, 2023) and Anchorage Ordinance AO 2024-69 amending Anchorage Municipal Code Chapter 3.102 (adopted July 31, 2024) as the body-worn camera framework, with explicit no-statewide-statute negative finding and rejection of any AS 18.65 or AS 12.62 body-cam framing. Anchored civilian access through the Alaska Public Records Act at AS 40.25.110 to .220 with the law-enforcement-records exception at AS 40.25.120(a)(6). Surfaced the Alaska Attorney General / Deputy Attorney General July 17, 2024 position on pre-charging release of officer-involved-shooting footage. Corrected the prior framing that listed AS 11.41.452 as the NCII statute: AS 11.41.452 is enticement of a minor, not NCII. The adult-victim NCII hook is AS 11.61.120(a)(6) and (a)(8) (harassment in the second degree, Class B misdemeanor); the minor-victim distribution hook is AS 11.61.116 (Class B misdemeanor person-to-person, Class A misdemeanor to Internet); the recording-side voyeurism hook is AS 11.61.123 (Class A misdemeanor adult, Class C or B felony minor). Updated the penalty math from the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press stale $1,000 fine figure to the current $25,000 cap under AS 12.55.035(b)(5) plus the one-year imprisonment cap under AS 12.55.135(a). Made explicit that Alaska has NO express state civil cause of action under AS 42.20: AS 42.20.330 is the criminal penalty grading section, not a civil remedy. Private plaintiffs rely on the federal ECPA civil action at 18 U.S.C. 2520 (statutory floor of $10,000 or $100 per day, plus punitive damages and reasonable attorney fees, two-year SOL under section 2520(e)) and on the Alaska common-law intrusion-upon-seclusion tort with the Alaska Constitution Article I Section 22 privacy clause as constitutional reinforcement (two-year SOL under AS 09.10.070 with discovery rule). Added Bartnicki v. Vopper, 532 U.S. 514 (2001) as the federal First Amendment overlay for downstream publication. Reframed NLRB GC 25-05 (February 14, 2025; Acting General Counsel William B. Cowen) as a housekeeping rescission of prior General Counsel memoranda for backlog management, NOT a Boeing reinstatement; Stericycle, Inc., 372 NLRB No. 113 (August 2, 2023) remains controlling Board law. Added NLRB GC 25-07 (June 26, 2025) as narrowly scoped to surreptitious recording of collective-bargaining sessions. Updated FCC Order 23-107 (FCC 24-24) to vacated by 11th Cir. Insurance Marketing Coalition Ltd. v. FCC, No. 24-10277 (decided January 24, 2025; mandate April 30, 2025), with FCC subsequent removal of 47 C.F.R. 64.1200(f)(9). Removed reliance on 47 C.F.R. 64.501 (removed November 20, 2017 under Modernizing Common Carrier Rules). Preserved FCC Declaratory Ruling 24-17 (February 8, 2024) as active and in force for AI-generated voices in robocalls. Replaced the prior version's two aggregator URLs for Palmer and AS 11.61.123 plus one secondary-codifier URL for 18 U.S.C. 2511 with courts.alaska.gov, akleg.gov, and uscode.house.gov primary sources. Populated the previously empty Supabase secondary_keywords array with the 15-keyword cluster. Net add approximately 1,100 words from the State v. Glass overlay, the Ninth Circuit Fordyce / Askins framing, the HB 47 / TAKE IT DOWN Act block, the DPS Policy 241 / AO 2024-69 body-cam block, the explicit no-state-civil-cause negative finding, and the AS 11.41.452 / AS 11.61.120 / AS 11.61.116 / AS 11.61.123 mapping correction.

Refresh: Verified SB 85 status (introduced February 5, 2025; in Senate Labor and Commerce Committee; no action since introduction). Added State v. Glass, 583 P.2d 872 (Alaska 1978) constitutional overlay and Cleveland v. State (Alaska Ct. App. 2020) particularity standard. Added Ninth Circuit Fordyce and Askins record-the-police framing. Surfaced HB 47 (passed Alaska House 39-0 on February 27, 2026; in Senate Judiciary as of April 10, 2026). Added TAKE IT DOWN Act, Pub. L. 119-12. Added DPS OPM Chapter 241 (May 1, 2023) and Anchorage AO 2024-69 (July 31, 2024) body-cam framework. Corrected AS 11.41.452 mis-tagging as NCII statute; adult NCII hook is AS 11.61.120(a)(6),(8); minor-victim distribution hook is AS 11.61.116. Updated penalty fine cap from stale $1,000 to $25,000 per AS 12.55.035(b)(5). Confirmed Alaska has no express state civil cause under AS 42.20; primary civil routes are 18 U.S.C. 2520 and Alaska intrusion-upon-seclusion tort. Reframed NLRB GC 25-05 as housekeeping, not a Boeing reinstatement; Stericycle remains controlling. Added NLRB GC 25-07 as scoped only to collective-bargaining sessions. Removed stale 47 C.F.R. 64.501 (removed 2017) and vacated FCC one-to-one consent rule.

Added wearable recording device guidance covering AI voice recorders (Plaud) and smart glasses (Meta Ray-Bans) under Alaska one-party consent law.

Sources and References

  1. akleg.gov.gov
  2. akleg.gov.gov
  3. akleg.gov.gov
  4. akleg.gov.gov
  5. akleg.gov.gov
  6. akleg.gov.gov
  7. akleg.gov.gov
  8. akleg.gov.gov
  9. akleg.gov.gov
  10. akleg.gov.gov
  11. akleg.gov.gov
  12. ltgov.alaska.gov.gov
  13. courts.alaska.gov.gov
  14. appellate-records.courts.alaska.gov.gov
  15. akleg.gov.gov
  16. akleg.gov.gov
  17. akleg.gov.gov
  18. akleg.gov.gov
  19. dps.alaska.gov.gov
  20. muni.org
  21. courtlistener.com
  22. courtlistener.com
  23. supremecourt.gov.gov
  24. uscode.house.gov.gov
  25. congress.gov.gov
  26. nlrb.gov.gov
  27. docs.fcc.gov.gov
  28. law.alaska.gov.gov
Share: