{"id":328,"date":"2026-09-18T13:21:03","date_gmt":"2026-09-18T13:21:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/oncallasolutions.com\/blog\/one-party-two-party-consent-states\/"},"modified":"2026-09-18T18:21:15","modified_gmt":"2026-09-18T18:21:15","slug":"one-party-two-party-consent-states","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/oncallasolutions.com\/blog\/one-party-two-party-consent-states\/","title":{"rendered":"One-Party vs. Two-Party Consent States: The Full List for 2026"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Recording a phone call legally depends entirely on which state (or states) the call touches. Thirteen states require <strong>every<\/strong> participant on the call to consent before it can be recorded &#8212; these are called &#8220;two-party&#8221; or &#8220;all-party&#8221; consent states. The remaining 37 states plus Washington, D.C. only require <strong>one<\/strong> participant to consent, which can be your own business. Get this wrong and you&#8217;re not just risking an awkward conversation &#8212; in several states, recording a call without proper consent is a criminal offense.<\/p>\n<p><em>Last reviewed September 2026. Statute citations were cross-checked against the state codes as summarized in <a href=\"https:\/\/www.justia.com\/50-state-surveys\/recording-phone-calls-and-conversations\/\" rel=\"noopener\" target=\"_blank\">Justia&#8217;s 50-State Survey on recording phone calls and conversations<\/a> (last reviewed September 2024). Laws change &#8212; verify with a licensed attorney before relying on any entry.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Download:<\/strong> <a href=\"https:\/\/oncallasolutions.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/call-recording-consent-laws-by-state.csv\">call-recording-consent-laws-by-state.csv<\/a> &#8212; all 50 states and D.C., with consent type and primary statute. Free to use with attribution.<\/p>\n<h2>One-Party vs. Two-Party Consent: What&#8217;s the Difference?<\/h2>\n<p><strong>One-party consent<\/strong> means the recording is legal as long as one person on the call &#8212; including the person or business doing the recording &#8212; knows about and agrees to it. The other party doesn&#8217;t need to be told.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Two-party (all-party) consent<\/strong> means every single person on the call must agree to being recorded before you can legally record it. Silence or a beep tone isn&#8217;t enough in most of these states &#8212; you generally need affirmative consent, such as stating &#8220;this call may be recorded&#8221; and giving the caller a chance to object or hang up.<\/p>\n<p>Federal law (the Wiretap Act) sets the baseline at one-party consent, but individual states are free to set a stricter standard &#8212; which is exactly what the 13 two-party states below have done.<\/p>\n<h2>The 13 Two-Party (All-Party) Consent States<\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li>California<\/li>\n<li>Connecticut*<\/li>\n<li>Delaware*<\/li>\n<li>Florida<\/li>\n<li>Illinois<\/li>\n<li>Maryland<\/li>\n<li>Massachusetts<\/li>\n<li>Michigan*<\/li>\n<li>Montana*<\/li>\n<li>Nevada*<\/li>\n<li>New Hampshire<\/li>\n<li>Pennsylvania<\/li>\n<li>Washington<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>*See the nuances below &#8212; these five states don&#8217;t apply a flat all-party rule in every situation.<\/p>\n<h3>State-by-State Nuances Worth Knowing<\/h3>\n<p><strong>Connecticut<\/strong> requires all-party consent for civil liability on recordings of telephone conversations, but only one-party consent for in-person conversations &#8212; essentially the reverse of Oregon&#8217;s rule below.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Michigan<\/strong> is generally treated as all-party consent, but courts have recognized a narrow &#8220;participant&#8221; exception. Businesses should still plan around all-party consent to stay safe.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Montana<\/strong> technically requires <em>notification<\/em> that a call is being recorded rather than explicit consent, but is commonly treated as an all-party consent state in practice.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Delaware<\/strong> is arguably an all-party consent state, but there is real ambiguity. 11 Del. Code &#167; 1335 prohibits intercepting a private conversation without the consent of all parties, yet a federal court in <em>U.S. v. Vespe<\/em> found the statute was meant to track the federal one-party rule. Because the risk is not settled, businesses should treat Delaware as requiring all-party consent.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Nevada<\/strong> treats phone calls (and text messages) as all-party consent under Nev. Rev. Stat. &#167; 200.620, while in-person conversations follow a one-party standard. For a call center or answering service, the phone rule is the one that matters.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Illinois<\/strong> and <strong>Washington<\/strong> are generally all-party consent states. Their statutes (720 ILCS 5\/14-2 and Wash. Rev. Code &#167; 9.73.030) focus on private communications, so the details can depend on whether the parties had a reasonable expectation of privacy. Businesses should still plan around all-party consent on calls.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Oregon<\/strong> is actually a <em>one-party<\/em> consent state for phone and other electronic communications &#8212; but it flips to all-party consent for in-person conversations. It&#8217;s often mistakenly grouped with the two-party states because of this in-person rule.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Vermont<\/strong> has no specific statute governing call recording consent at all. Case law suggests all-party consent may be favored for conversations in private settings, so businesses should exercise caution and treat it as if it required consent.<\/p>\n<h2>Full List: Every State&#8217;s Consent Requirement<\/h2>\n<table>\n<thead>\n<tr>\n<th>State<\/th>\n<th>Consent Type<\/th>\n<th>Primary Statute<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td>Alabama<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>Ala. Code &#167; 13A-11-30<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Alaska<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>Alaska Stat. &#167; 42.20.310<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Arizona<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>Ariz. Rev. Stat. &#167; 13-3005; &#167; 13-3012<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Arkansas<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>Ark. Code &#167; 5-60-120<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>California<\/td>\n<td>Two-Party<\/td>\n<td>Cal. Penal Code &#167; 632; &#167; 632.7<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Colorado<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>Colo. Rev. Stat. &#167; 18-9-303; &#167; 18-9-304<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Connecticut<\/td>\n<td>Two-Party*<\/td>\n<td>Conn. Gen. Stat. &#167; 53a-187, &#167; 53a-189; &#167; 52-570d<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Delaware<\/td>\n<td>Two-Party*<\/td>\n<td>Del. Code tit. 11, &#167; 1335; &#167; 2402<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Florida<\/td>\n<td>Two-Party<\/td>\n<td>Fla. Stat. &#167; 934.03<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Georgia<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>Ga. Code &#167; 16-11-62; &#167; 16-11-66<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Hawaii<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>Haw. Rev. Stat. &#167; 803-42<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Idaho<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>Idaho Code &#167; 18-6702<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Illinois<\/td>\n<td>Two-Party<\/td>\n<td>720 ILCS 5\/14-2<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Indiana<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>Ind. Code &#167; 35-33.5-5-5<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Iowa<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>Iowa Code &#167; 808B.2<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Kansas<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>Kan. Stat. &#167; 21-6101<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Kentucky<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>Ky. Rev. Stat. &#167; 526.020<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Louisiana<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>La. Rev. Stat. &#167; 15:1303<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Maine<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 15, &#167; 710<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Maryland<\/td>\n<td>Two-Party<\/td>\n<td>Md. Code, Cts. &amp; Jud. Proc. &#167; 10-402<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Massachusetts<\/td>\n<td>Two-Party<\/td>\n<td>Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 272, &#167; 99<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Michigan<\/td>\n<td>Two-Party*<\/td>\n<td>Mich. Comp. Laws &#167; 750.539c<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Minnesota<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>Minn. Stat. &#167; 626A.02<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Mississippi<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>Miss. Code &#167; 41-29-531<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Missouri<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>Mo. Rev. Stat. &#167; 542.402<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Montana<\/td>\n<td>Two-Party*<\/td>\n<td>Mont. Code &#167; 45-8-213<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Nebraska<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>Neb. Rev. Stat. &#167; 86-290<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Nevada<\/td>\n<td>Two-Party*<\/td>\n<td>Nev. Rev. Stat. &#167; 200.620<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>New Hampshire<\/td>\n<td>Two-Party<\/td>\n<td>N.H. Rev. Stat. &#167; 570-A:2<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>New Jersey<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>N.J. Stat. &#167; 2A:156A-3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>New Mexico<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>N.M. Stat. &#167; 30-12-1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>New York<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>N.Y. Penal Law &#167; 250.05<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>North Carolina<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>N.C. Gen. Stat. &#167; 15A-287<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>North Dakota<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>N.D. Cent. Code &#167; 12.1-15-02<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Ohio<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>Ohio Rev. Code &#167; 2933.52<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Oklahoma<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>Okla. Stat. tit. 13, &#167; 176.3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Oregon<\/td>\n<td>One-Party*<\/td>\n<td>Or. Rev. Stat. &#167; 165.540<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Pennsylvania<\/td>\n<td>Two-Party<\/td>\n<td>18 Pa. Cons. Stat. &#167; 5703<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Rhode Island<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>R.I. Gen. Laws &#167; 11-35-21<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>South Carolina<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>S.C. Code &#167; 17-30-20<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>South Dakota<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>S.D. Codified Laws &#167; 23A-35A-20<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Tennessee<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>Tenn. Code &#167; 39-13-601<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Texas<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>Tex. Penal Code &#167; 16.02<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Utah<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>Utah Code &#167; 77-23a-4<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Vermont<\/td>\n<td>One-Party*<\/td>\n<td>No specific statute<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Virginia<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>Va. Code &#167; 19.2-62<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Washington<\/td>\n<td>Two-Party<\/td>\n<td>Wash. Rev. Code &#167; 9.73.030<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>West Virginia<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>W. Va. Code &#167; 62-1D-3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Wisconsin<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>Wis. Stat. &#167; 968.31<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Wyoming<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>Wyo. Stat. &#167; 7-3-702<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Washington, D.C.<\/td>\n<td>One-Party<\/td>\n<td>D.C. Code &#167; 23-542<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<p>*See the nuances section above for Connecticut, Delaware, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, and Vermont.<\/p>\n<h2>The Federal Baseline and the Multi-State Problem<\/h2>\n<p>The federal Wiretap Act (18 U.S.C. &#167; 2511) makes it a crime to intercept a phone call without consent, but it does not apply when one party to the call has given consent &#8212; a one-party rule. States may be stricter, and 13 are.<\/p>\n<p>The hard case for businesses is a call that crosses state lines. In <em>Kearney v. Salomon Smith Barney, Inc.<\/em> (2006), the California Supreme Court held that California&#8217;s all-party rule applies when a California resident is on a call with someone in a one-party state. Courts in different states have reached different conclusions about which law governs, which is why following the strictest applicable rule is the safe default.<\/p>\n<h2>What This Means If You Take Calls From Multiple States<\/h2>\n<p>If your business takes calls from customers across the country &#8212; which is true for most call centers and answering services &#8212; the safest practice is to follow the <strong>strictest applicable law<\/strong>. That means treating every call as if it requires all-party consent: state clearly that the call may be recorded, and give the caller a real opportunity to object before proceeding. This single habit protects you regardless of which state either party is calling from.<\/p>\n<h2>Why This Matters for Call Centers and Answering Services<\/h2>\n<p>Call recording is standard practice for quality assurance, dispute resolution, and training &#8212; but it only protects your business if it&#8217;s done legally. A recording made without proper consent in a two-party state isn&#8217;t just inadmissible if you ever need it; in several states, making it in the first place is a criminal wiretapping offense. If you outsource your phone coverage to a call center or answering service, ask directly how they handle consent across different states &#8212; it should be a standard part of their call-handling protocol, not an afterthought.<\/p>\n<h2>Cite or Share This List<\/h2>\n<p>If you reference this list in an article, policy, or training document, please link to this page. Suggested citation:<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>OnCalla Solutions. &#8220;One-Party vs. Two-Party Consent States: The Full List for 2026.&#8221; https:\/\/oncallasolutions.com\/blog\/one-party-two-party-consent-states\/ (reviewed September 2026).<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>State-specific summaries are also on our location pages, for example <a href=\"https:\/\/oncallasolutions.com\/call-centers\/california\">California<\/a>, <a href=\"https:\/\/oncallasolutions.com\/call-centers\/florida\">Florida<\/a>, <a href=\"https:\/\/oncallasolutions.com\/call-centers\/illinois\">Illinois<\/a>, and <a href=\"https:\/\/oncallasolutions.com\/call-centers\/texas\">Texas<\/a>. Spotted a change in a state law or an error in this list? Email <a href=\"mailto:sales@oncallasolutions.com\">sales@oncallasolutions.com<\/a> and we will review it.<\/p>\n<h2>Frequently Asked Questions<\/h2>\n<h3>What happens if I record a call without consent in a two-party state?<\/h3>\n<p>Consequences vary by state, but can include civil liability (the other party suing you for damages) and, in some states, criminal charges. This is exactly why the safest practice is following the strictest applicable law on every call, regardless of where you&#8217;re located.<\/p>\n<h3>Does a recorded disclaimer message count as consent?<\/h3>\n<p>In many one-party states, yes &#8212; simply notifying callers that the call may be recorded is generally sufficient. In two-party states, best practice is to get an affirmative response (or at minimum, give the caller a clear, real opportunity to hang up) rather than relying on a passive disclaimer alone.<\/p>\n<h3>Do these laws apply to text messages or emails?<\/h3>\n<p>These specific wiretapping\/consent laws are about recording oral communications (phone calls, in-person conversations). Text messages and emails are generally governed by different legal frameworks.<\/p>\n<h3>Is Washington, D.C. a state for these purposes?<\/h3>\n<p>D.C. isn&#8217;t a state, but it follows the one-party consent standard, so we&#8217;ve included it here for completeness.<\/p>\n<p><em>This article is for general informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Laws can change, and how they apply to your specific situation may vary. Consult a licensed attorney in your state before making call-recording decisions for your business.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Which states require all-party consent to record a phone call? Full state-by-state list, the real legal nuances, and what it means for businesses that take calls nationwide.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":329,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_kad_blocks_custom_css":"","_kad_blocks_head_custom_js":"","_kad_blocks_body_custom_js":"","_kad_blocks_footer_custom_js":"","_kad_post_transparent":"","_kad_post_title":"","_kad_post_layout":"","_kad_post_sidebar_id":"","_kad_post_content_style":"","_kad_post_vertical_padding":"","_kad_post_feature":"","_kad_post_feature_position":"","_kad_post_header":false,"_kad_post_footer":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[15],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-328","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-resources"],"taxonomy_info":{"category":[{"value":15,"label":"Resources"}]},"featured_image_src_large":["https:\/\/oncallasolutions.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/one-party-two-party-consent-states-1024x538.png",1024,538,true],"author_info":{"display_name":"OnCalla Solutions","author_link":"https:\/\/oncallasolutions.com\/blog\/author\/oncallaadmin\/"},"comment_info":0,"category_info":[{"term_id":15,"name":"Resources","slug":"resources","term_group":0,"term_taxonomy_id":15,"taxonomy":"category","description":"","parent":0,"count":9,"filter":"raw","cat_ID":15,"category_count":9,"category_description":"","cat_name":"Resources","category_nicename":"resources","category_parent":0}],"tag_info":false,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/oncallasolutions.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/328","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/oncallasolutions.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/oncallasolutions.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/oncallasolutions.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/oncallasolutions.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=328"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/oncallasolutions.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/328\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":350,"href":"https:\/\/oncallasolutions.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/328\/revisions\/350"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/oncallasolutions.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/329"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/oncallasolutions.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=328"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/oncallasolutions.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=328"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/oncallasolutions.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=328"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}