EnglishEspañol
Recording LawsKansas Laws flagKansas Laws
Kansas flag

Kansas

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

Independently fact-checkedEditor-reviewedLaw current as of August 15, 2026By Recording Law Editorial TeamReviewed August 26, 202614 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. · 26 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

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

Kansas is a one-party consent state for phone calls, in-person conversations, and electronic communications. Under K.S.A. 21-6101(a)(1), only the sender or receiver of a private communication must consent to recording. Illegal recording is a criminal offense and creates civil liability under K.S.A. 22-2518. The Kansas Supreme Court adopted the one-party reading in State v. Wigley, 210 Kan. 472, 502 P.2d 819 (1972) and reaffirmed it for face-to-face recording in State v. Roudybush, 235 Kan. 834, 686 P.2d 100 (1984).

Kansas recording law at a glance

QuestionAnswer
Consent ruleOne-party
Main statuteK.S.A. 21-6101 (breach of privacy)
When recording is illegalRecording a private communication you are not a party to; installing hidden devices in private places without consent
Criminal penalty (audio core)Class A nonperson misdemeanor: up to 1 year jail, up to $2,500 fine
Criminal penalty (voyeurism/NCII)Severity level 8 person felony (first); severity level 5 (repeat or dissemination)
Civil remedyK.S.A. 22-2518: greater of actual damages, $100/day, or $1,000 minimum, plus punitive damages and attorney fees
Hidden camerasSeverity level 8 person felony for capture; level 5 for dissemination under K.S.A. 21-6101(a)(6)-(a)(7)
Recording policeClearly established First Amendment right in public per Irizarry v. Yehia (10th Cir. 2022)

For a deeper dive on any of these topics, see the Kansas recording laws in depth section below.

Recording in-person conversations in Kansas

Kansas applies the one-party rule to face-to-face conversations. K.S.A. 21-6101(a)(1) makes it a crime to intercept a private communication without the consent of the sender or receiver. A participant in the conversation is the sender or receiver, so a participant may record without notifying anyone else.

The one-party construction of that language comes from State v. Wigley, 210 Kan. 472, 502 P.2d 819 (1972), which involved a taped telephone conversation between the defendant and an informer who consented to the recording. The Kansas Supreme Court held there was no violation of the provision then numbered K.S.A. 21-4002(1)(a), which "enjoins only interceptions without the consent of either the sender or the receiver."

State v. Roudybush, 235 Kan. 834, 686 P.2d 100 (1984) reaffirmed that reading and extended it to face-to-face recording. A police informant wore a body transmitter into Roudybush's home during a marijuana buy. The court found no violation of the eavesdropping provisions then numbered K.S.A. 21-4001(1)(a) and (1)(b): the informant was an invited party to the conversation, not the "unknown and uninvited presence" the surreptitious-listening prohibition is aimed at, and the officers neither entered the property nor planted the device themselves. The court separately held that a face-to-face private conversation between a police informer and a suspect is not an "oral communication" under K.S.A. 22-2514, so no ex parte court order was needed to intercept it. It reached the same result the federal one-party rule reaches under 18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(c) and (d).

The two statutes Roudybush construed no longer carry those numbers. The 2010 recodification of the Kansas criminal code (L. 2010, ch. 136, sec. 171) consolidated the former eavesdropping statute (K.S.A. 21-4001) and the former breach-of-privacy statute (K.S.A. 21-4002) into the single section now numbered K.S.A. 21-6101. Today's subsection (a)(1) is old 21-4002(1)(a) carried forward word for word; old 21-4001 supplied what are now subsections (a)(3) and (a)(4).

Two adjacent subsections set limits. Subsection (a)(3) criminalizes entering a place with intent to listen surreptitiously to private conversations. Subsection (a)(4) criminalizes installing or using a device for recording sounds in a private place without the consent of persons entitled to privacy. Both reach non-participant surveillance. Someone who plants a recorder in a bedroom, break room, or private office and leaves is not a participant under (a)(1); the conduct falls under (a)(4) instead.

Conversations in public spaces where no one has a reasonable expectation of privacy are generally outside K.S.A. 21-6101. Recording at a public park, sidewalk, restaurant dining room, or retail floor is lawful for anyone present. A "private place" under K.S.A. 21-6101(f) is a location where a person may reasonably expect to be safe from uninvited intrusion or surveillance.

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

Recording phone calls in Kansas

You can record any phone call you participate in under K.S.A. 21-6101(a)(1). The one-party rule applies to landlines, mobile calls, VoIP (Zoom, Teams, Google Meet, FaceTime audio, WhatsApp voice), PBX and cloud-recorded calls, and voicemails. You do not need to announce the recording or use a beep tone.

Federal ECPA at 18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(d) is also a one-party-consent rule for participant recording, matching the Kansas framework. A separate subsection, (a)(5), criminalizes installing a tap or splitter on the line without the consent of the person in control of the facilities, regardless of whether either speaker consented.

K.S.A. 21-6101(a)(1)'s interception language reaches a private communication while it is being sent, not a message that has already been delivered and is accessed later. In State v. Brooks, 46 Kan. App. 2d 601, 265 P.3d 1175 (2011), rev'd on other grounds, 298 Kan. 672, 317 P.3d 54 (2014), the Kansas Court of Appeals reversed a breach-of-privacy conviction for insufficient evidence because the defendant accessed his ex-wife's email account and copied messages seven to nine months after she received them; surreptitiously accessing communications that far after the fact did not amount to "interception." The distinction matters for email and text messages specifically: reading someone else's already-received messages without authorization falls outside K.S.A. 21-6101(a)(1), even though it may still raise other legal exposure.

For interstate calls, the practical rule is to follow the strictest applicable state's law. Calls that touch California, Florida, Illinois, Pennsylvania, or Washington require disclosure to all parties. The simplest fix is a brief announcement at the start: "This call is being recorded." That satisfies all-party-consent statutes that allow recording upon notice plus continued participation.

For in-depth treatment of phone-call recording rules, see Kansas Phone Call Recording Laws.

Kansas a dome security camera in the corner of an office ceiling

Hidden cameras, doorbells, and nanny cams

The hidden-camera prohibition is K.S.A. 21-6101(a)(6). It reaches installing or using a camera of any type to videotape, film, photograph, or record an identifiable person under or through their clothing (upskirt), or a person who is nude or in a state of undress, with intent to invade that person's privacy, under circumstances in which that person has a reasonable expectation of privacy. Capture is a severity level 8 person felony on a first offense and a severity level 5 on a second or subsequent conviction within five years.

Subsection (a)(7) applies to dissemination of material obtained through a (a)(6) violation. Distribution is a severity level 5 person felony outright, even on a first offense. Kansas treats sharing voyeurism material as more harmful than the original capture.

Kansas does not have a separate stand-alone voyeurism statute. The voyeurism crime is consolidated inside K.S.A. 21-6101, the same section as the wiretap prohibition.

For your own property, a doorbell camera or exterior security camera aimed at public space or your own property is generally lawful. An audio-capable camera inside your home may trigger K.S.A. 21-6101 exposure when it records guests or workers in conversations to which no participant has consented. A camera placed inside a bathroom, locker room, dressing room, or other private space violates subsection (a)(6) regardless of who owns the premises.

For deeper coverage, see Kansas Security Camera Laws, Kansas Video Recording Laws, and Kansas Voyeurism Laws.

Kansas three smartphones around a blank document on a wooden desk

Penalties for illegal recording in Kansas

K.S.A. 21-6101 has a bifurcated penalty structure. The audio-interception core is misdemeanor. The visual and intimate-image prongs are felony, with the level determined by the subsection and the defendant's criminal-history score under K.S.A. 21-6804.

SubsectionConductClassificationMax penalty
(a)(1)Wire/phone interception without consentClass A nonperson misdemeanor1 year jail; $2,500 fine
(a)(2)Downstream disclosure of illegal interceptionClass A nonperson misdemeanor1 year jail; $2,500 fine
(a)(3)Surreptitious entry to listen or observeClass A nonperson misdemeanor1 year jail; $2,500 fine
(a)(4)Private-place recording device without consentClass A nonperson misdemeanor1 year jail; $2,500 fine
(a)(5)Tap-the-line device without consentClass A nonperson misdemeanor1 year jail; $2,500 fine
(a)(6) first offenseHidden-camera capture of nude or undressed personSeverity level 8 person felonyGrid range typically 7-23 months (K.S.A. 21-6804)
(a)(6) repeat within 5 yearsHidden-camera captureSeverity level 5 person felonyGrid range typically 31-136 months
(a)(7)Dissemination of voyeurism imagerySeverity level 5 person felonyGrid range typically 31-136 months
(a)(8) first offenseNCII or AI-deepfake intimate-image disseminationSeverity level 8 person felonyGrid range typically 7-23 months
(a)(8) repeat within 5 yearsNCII or AI-deepfake disseminationSeverity level 5 person felonyGrid range typically 31-136 months

The misdemeanor caps come from K.S.A. 21-6602(a)(1) (jail) and K.S.A. 21-6611(b)(1) (fine). Felony fines follow a separate scale: because subsections (a)(6) through (a)(8) are ranked severity levels 8 and 5 on the nondrug sentencing grid, a court may also impose a fine on top of any prison term under K.S.A. 21-6611: up to $100,000 for severity levels 6 through 10 under subsection (a)(3), and up to $300,000 for severity level 5 felonies (such as repeat offenses and the dissemination felony) under subsection (a)(2). Severity level 8 felonies carry presumptive probation in some grid blocks; severity level 5 is presumptive imprisonment in most blocks. A court may also impose post-release supervision, restitution, no-contact orders, and (for sex-offense subsections) Kansas Offender Registration Act registration.

For civil liability, K.S.A. 22-2518 entitles a plaintiff to the greater of actual damages, $100 a day of violation, or a $1,000 minimum, plus punitive damages and reasonable attorney fees. Good-faith reliance on a court order is a complete defense. A separate common-law claim for intrusion upon seclusion, recognized in Werner v. Kliewer, 238 Kan. 289 (1985) and Froelich v. Adair, 213 Kan. 357 (1973), covers recording scenarios that fall outside the wire, oral, or electronic scope of K.S.A. 22-2518.

Kansas wooden gavel on a sound block on a judge's bench

Recording the police in Kansas

Kansas is in the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. The Tenth Circuit's record-the-police law developed in two steps.

Frasier v. Evans, 992 F.3d 1003 (10th Cir. 2021), cert. denied, 142 S. Ct. 427 (2021), arose from an August 2014 incident in Denver. Officers searched a bystander's tablet for video he had taken during a police arrest. The Tenth Circuit granted the officers qualified immunity, finding the right to record on-duty police was not "clearly established" in the circuit at the time of the 2014 conduct.

Irizarry v. Yehia, 38 F.4th 1282 (10th Cir. 2022) changed the picture. A journalist filming a May 2019 DUI stop was obstructed by an officer who shined a flashlight into the camera. The Tenth Circuit held that, as of May 2019, there was a clearly established First Amendment right to film on-duty police performing official duties in public. The officer was denied qualified immunity on the First Amendment retaliation claim.

Taken together, Kansas officers have been on notice since at least May 2019 that interfering with peaceful filming of police in public can support a Section 1983 claim. Practical limits: stay back a reasonable distance, do not block officers or emergency personnel, comply with lawful content-neutral time/place/manner orders, and do not trespass to film.

For more, see Kansas Laws on Recording Police.

Special topics in Kansas

AI deepfakes and SB 186 (2025)

Senate Bill 186 of 2025 (L. 2025 ch. 120 sec. 3), signed by Governor Laura Kelly on April 24, 2025 and effective July 1, 2025, amended K.S.A. 21-6101(a)(8) to expressly reach AI-altered or digitally modified intimate images of identifiable adults. Liability attaches even if the depicted person was never involved in creating any original image. The penalty mirrors (a)(8)'s baseline: severity level 8 person felony on a first offense, severity level 5 on a repeat within five years.

The federal TAKE IT DOWN Act (Pub. L. 119-12, signed May 19, 2025) layers a federal criminal prohibition and a 48-hour platform notice-and-takedown obligation (effective May 19, 2026) enforced by the FTC. Kansas victims now have a stacked remedy: state criminal prosecution under (a)(8), federal criminal prosecution, FTC complaint for platform non-compliance, and a civil claim under K.S.A. 22-2518.

Open meetings and KOMA

The Kansas Open Meetings Act (K.S.A. 75-4317 et seq.) requires open meetings of state and local public bodies. The right to record one is in the act itself, not in agency guidance: K.S.A. 75-4318(e) provides that "the use of cameras, photographic lights and recording devices shall not be prohibited at any meeting mentioned by subsection (a), but such use shall be subject to reasonable rules designed to insure the orderly conduct of the proceedings at such meeting." A public body may set reasonable order-keeping rules, but it cannot prohibit recording outright. The Kansas Attorney General's KOMA resources are a useful plain-language guide to the rest of the act. KOMA does not apply to the Kansas Legislature, courts, or properly noticed executive sessions under K.S.A. 75-4319.

Body-worn cameras and KORA

Kansas's body-camera regime is in K.S.A. 45-254 under the Kansas Open Records Act. Agencies must allow the subject of a recording, the parent or guardian of a minor subject, the subject's attorney, or certain heirs to listen to or view recordings within 20 days of a request. Kansas has no statewide body-camera deployment mandate; each agency decides. Correct citation is K.S.A. 45-254, not K.S.A. 75-7710 or K.S.A. 22-3431 (those sections are unrelated).

Workplace recording and NLRA overlay

A Kansas employee who participates in a workplace conversation can lawfully record it under K.S.A. 21-6101(a)(1). For private-sector employers, the NLRB's decision in Stericycle, Inc., 372 NLRB No. 113 (Aug. 2, 2023) requires that any no-recording handbook rule advance a legitimate, substantial business interest that a narrower rule cannot serve. NLRB GC 25-07 (June 25, 2025) is narrow: it addresses surreptitious recording of collective-bargaining sessions only, not general workplace recording. Installing a hidden microphone in a break room, restroom, or private office to capture employee conversations to which the employer is not a party violates K.S.A. 21-6101(a)(4). For more, see Kansas Workplace Recording Laws.

Federal ECPA and FCC overlay

Federal ECPA at 18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(d) is a one-party-consent floor matching Kansas law. FCC Declaratory Ruling 24-17 (released February 2024) classifies AI-generated and voice-cloned calls as "artificial or prerecorded voice" under the TCPA, requiring prior express written consent for marketing calls to wireless and residential numbers. FCC 24-24 (the One-to-One Consent Rule) was vacated by the Eleventh Circuit in Insurance Marketing Coalition Ltd. v. FCC, 127 F.4th 303 (11th Cir. 2025), mandate April 30, 2025; it is no longer in force. The old carrier disclosure rule at 47 C.F.R. § 64.501 was removed in 2017 and should not be cited.

HIPAA in Kansas clinical settings

The HIPAA Privacy Rule binds Kansas covered entities (University of Kansas Health System, Stormont Vail Health, Ascension Via Christi, Children's Mercy Kansas-side facilities, the Kansas City VA Medical Center, and others), not patients. A patient may record their own visit under one-party consent; a covered entity recording a patient needs HIPAA authorization. Facility policies barring third-party recording in clinical areas are private-property rules, not HIPAA mandates. For more, see Kansas Medical Recording Laws.

  • July 1, 2025: SB 186 (L. 2025 ch. 120 sec. 3) takes effect, expanding K.S.A. 21-6101(a)(8) to cover AI-altered and digitally modified intimate images of identifiable adults.
  • May 19, 2025: TAKE IT DOWN Act (Pub. L. 119-12) signed; federal criminal provision effective on signature; platform 48-hour takedown obligation effective May 19, 2026.
  • April 24, 2025: Governor Laura Kelly signs SB 186 of 2025.
  • April 30, 2025: Eleventh Circuit mandate issues vacating FCC 24-24 (One-to-One Consent Rule); rule is no longer in force.
  • June 25, 2025: NLRB GC 25-07 declares surreptitious recording of collective-bargaining sessions a per se unfair labor practice.
  • 2022: Irizarry v. Yehia, 38 F.4th 1282 (10th Cir. 2022) establishes clearly established First Amendment right to film police in public as of May 2019 in the Tenth Circuit (binding in Kansas).

Kansas recording laws in depth

Want to know more? Each page below covers a specific recording-law context in greater depth.

By type of recording

By place or relationship

More Kansas 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 Kansas attorney.

More Kansas Laws

Frequently Asked Questions

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

Kansas is a one-party consent state. K.S.A. 21-6101(a)(1) prohibits intercepting a private communication without the consent of the sender or receiver. The Kansas Supreme Court read that language in State v. Wigley, 210 Kan. 472, 502 P.2d 819 (1972) as reaching only interceptions made without the consent of either the sender or the receiver, and reaffirmed the point for face-to-face recording in State v. Roudybush, 235 Kan. 834, 686 P.2d 100 (1984). A participant can record a phone call or in-person conversation without telling the other party.

Can I record a phone call in Kansas without telling the other person?

Yes, if you are a party to the call. K.S.A. 21-6101(a)(1) requires only the sender's or receiver's consent, and federal ECPA at 18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(d) applies the same rule. You do not need to announce the recording. For interstate calls touching California, Florida, Illinois, Pennsylvania, or Washington, follow the stricter state's law as a practical matter.

What is the penalty for illegal recording in Kansas?

It depends on the subsection. Subsections (a)(1) through (a)(5) (audio interception, disclosure, surreptitious entry, private-place device, tap-the-line) are Class A nonperson misdemeanors: up to 1 year in jail under K.S.A. 21-6602 and up to a $2,500 fine under K.S.A. 21-6611. Hidden-camera capture under (a)(6) is a severity level 8 person felony on a first offense. Dissemination of voyeurism imagery under (a)(7) is a severity level 5 person felony outright. NCII or AI-deepfake dissemination under (a)(8) mirrors the (a)(6) penalty tier. Sentencing ranges depend on criminal-history score under K.S.A. 21-6804.

Can I sue someone for recording me illegally in Kansas?

Yes. K.S.A. 22-2518 entitles you to the greater of actual damages, $100 a day of violation, or $1,000 minimum, plus punitive damages and reasonable attorney fees. Good-faith reliance on a court order is a complete defense. For hidden-video scenarios outside the wire/oral/electronic scope of K.S.A. 22-2518, common-law intrusion upon seclusion is the fallback. The two-year limitations period under K.S.A. 60-513(a)(4) likely applies.

Are Ring doorbells and nanny cams legal in Kansas?

An exterior camera aimed at public space or your own property is generally lawful. A camera inside a bathroom, locker room, dressing room, or other private space violates K.S.A. 21-6101(a)(6) regardless of who owns the premises. An audio-capable indoor camera may trigger liability under K.S.A. 21-6101 when it records conversations in which no participant has consented.

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

Yes, as a participant. Kansas's one-party rule under K.S.A. 21-6101(a)(1) applies to workplace conversations. Your employer may still discipline or terminate you for violating a no-recording workplace policy, even if the recording is legal under Kansas law. NLRB Stericycle requires any such policy to be narrowly tailored to a legitimate business interest.

Can I record the police in Kansas?

Yes. The Tenth Circuit, which includes Kansas, held in Irizarry v. Yehia, 38 F.4th 1282 (10th Cir. 2022) that there is a clearly established First Amendment right to film on-duty police in public as of May 2019. Do not interfere with police activity, record from a reasonable distance, and comply with lawful time, place, and manner orders.

What did Kansas SB 186 of 2025 change about AI deepfakes?

SB 186 (L. 2025 ch. 120 sec. 3), effective July 1, 2025, amended K.S.A. 21-6101(a)(8) to cover AI-altered or digitally modified intimate images of identifiable adults. Liability attaches even if the depicted person had no involvement in creating any original image. Dissemination with intent to harass, threaten, or intimidate is a severity level 8 person felony (first offense) or level 5 (repeat within five years). The federal TAKE IT DOWN Act (Pub. L. 119-12) adds a federal criminal prohibition and a 48-hour platform takedown obligation effective May 19, 2026.

Updates

Corrected the Kansas case law discussion: State v. Wigley (1972) is identified as the source of the one-party consent construction with State v. Roudybush (1984) reaffirming it, a misstated Roudybush holding was replaced with the court’s actual rulings, the 2011 recodification is described as a consolidation of the former eavesdropping and breach-of-privacy statutes into K.S.A. 21-6101, the open-meetings recording right is now quoted from K.S.A. 75-4318(e), and both case citations now link to the opinions.

Split the criminal fine caps by severity tier under K.S.A. 21-6611 ($300,000 for severity level 5; $100,000 for levels 6-10) and removed a case link that pointed to a repealed statute page.

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

Governing law re-checked for recent changes

Reviewed and approved by an editor

Restructured for readability: tightened lede, added at-a-glance table, split core sections (in-person, phone calls, hidden cameras, penalties, police), condensed special topics (SB 186/deepfakes, KOMA, KORA, workplace, ECPA/FCC, HIPAA) into dedicated subsections, added in-depth links index, refreshed FAQ to 8 questions, confirmed all load-bearing facts (K.S.A. 21-6101 subsection structure and penalties, K.S.A. 22-2518 damages formula, SB 186 effective date) against ksrevisor.gov primary sources.

Refreshed for 2026 around the consolidated structure of K.S.A. 21-6101 'breach of privacy.' Anchored subsections (a)(1) through (a)(5) as Class A nonperson misdemeanors (up to 1 year jail under K.S.A. 21-6602; up to $2,500 fine under K.S.A. 21-6611) and subsections (a)(6), (a)(7), and (a)(8) as person felonies on the K.S.A. 21-6804 sentencing grid. Added SB 186 of 2025 (L. 2025 ch. 120 sec. 3), signed by Governor Laura Kelly on April 24, 2025 and effective July 1, 2025, amending K.S.A. 21-6101(a)(8) to reach AI-altered or digitally modified intimate images of identifiable adults. Corrected the controlling one-party-consent precedent to State v. Roudybush, 235 Kan. 834, 686 P.2d 100 (1984) (the baseline previously referenced 'State v. Roach,' which is not a Kansas Supreme Court case on this issue). Corrected the body-camera citation to K.S.A. 45-254 under the Kansas Open Records Act (the baseline previously referenced K.S.A. 75-7710 and 22-3431, both of which are unrelated). Documented the civil cause of action under K.S.A. 22-2518 (Kansas wiretap-procedure act): the greater of actual damages, $100 per day of violation, or $1,000 minimum, plus punitive damages and reasonable attorney fees; good-faith reliance on a court order is a complete defense. Added the Frasier-then-Irizarry Tenth Circuit progression for record-the-police: Frasier v. Evans, 992 F.3d 1003 (10th Cir. 2021) granted qualified immunity for August 2014 conduct, while Irizarry v. Yehia, 38 F.4th 1282 (10th Cir. 2022) recognized a clearly established First Amendment right as of May 2019 (Irizarry is a Tenth Circuit decision binding on Kansas, not an Eleventh Circuit decision). Added a Kansas Open Meetings Act recording-rights H2 under K.S.A. 75-4317 et seq. with the Kansas Attorney General KOMA FAQ as a unique Kansas differentiator. Updated FCC 24-24 (One-to-One Consent Rule) to vacated by 11th Cir. mandate April 30, 2025 and removed the stale 47 CFR § 64.501 (deleted November 20, 2017). Added NLRB Stericycle / GC 25-05 / GC 25-07 workplace recording overlay and the TAKE IT DOWN Act federal compliance (Pub. L. 119-12, signed May 19, 2025; platform notice-and-takedown effective May 19, 2026). Replaced commercial-codifier URLs with kslegislature.gov, ksrevisor.gov, kscourts.org, ag.ks.gov, ca10.uscourts.gov, fcc.gov, nlrb.gov, ftc.gov, and uscode.house.gov. Keywords array populated (was empty).

Refreshed for 2026 around the consolidated structure of K.S.A. 21-6101 'breach of privacy.' Anchored subsections (a)(1) through (a)(5) as Class A nonperson misdemeanors and subsections (a)(6), (a)(7), and (a)(8) as person felonies. Added SB 186 of 2025 (L. 2025 ch. 120 sec. 3), signed April 24, 2025 and effective July 1, 2025, amending K.S.A. 21-6101(a)(8) for AI-altered intimate images. Corrected controlling precedent to State v. Roudybush, 235 Kan. 834 (1984). Corrected body-camera citation to K.S.A. 45-254 under KORA. Added Irizarry v. Yehia, 38 F.4th 1282 (10th Cir. 2022) for record-the-police. Added KOMA recording-rights section. Added NLRB Stericycle/GC 25-05/GC 25-07 workplace overlay and TAKE IT DOWN Act (Pub. L. 119-12).

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

Sources and References

  1. ksrevisor.gov.gov
  2. ksrevisor.gov.gov
  3. ksrevisor.gov.gov
  4. ksrevisor.gov.gov
  5. ksrevisor.gov.gov
  6. ksrevisor.gov.gov
  7. ksrevisor.gov.gov
  8. ksrevisor.gov.gov
  9. ksrevisor.gov.gov
  10. ksrevisor.gov.gov
  11. ksrevisor.gov.gov
  12. kslegislature.gov.gov
  13. sos.ks.gov.gov
  14. ag.ks.gov.gov
  15. ag.ks.gov.gov
  16. ca10.uscourts.gov.gov
  17. ca10.uscourts.gov.gov
  18. uscode.house.gov.gov
  19. docs.fcc.gov.gov
  20. fcc.gov.gov
  21. media.ca11.uscourts.gov.gov
  22. congress.gov.gov
  23. nlrb.gov.gov
  24. nlrb.gov.gov
  25. justice.gov.gov
  26. ecfr.gov.gov
  27. State v. Roudybush, 235 Kan. 834, 686 P.2d 100 (1984)(courtlistener.com)
  28. State v. Wigley, 210 Kan. 472, 502 P.2d 819 (1972)(courtlistener.com)
  29. K.S.A. 75-4318 (open meetings; cameras, photographic lights and recording devices)(ksrevisor.gov)
Share: