Washington
Washington Laws on Recording in Public: What Is Legal and What Is Not (2026)
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 22, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of August 22, 2026. · 7 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content
In Washington, silent video and photography in public are legal under the First Amendment. Audio recording is different: RCW 9.73.030 requires all-party consent for private conversations, even when those conversations occur in a public place.
Washington protects the right to record in public spaces, but the rules are more nuanced than in many other states. The First Amendment broadly permits photography and videography in public. However, Washington's two-party consent law under RCW 9.73.030 applies to the audio capture of private conversations, even when those conversations occur in public places. The key question is always whether the persons being recorded had a reasonable expectation of privacy in their conversation.
This guide explains what you can and cannot record in public spaces in Washington.
The First Amendment and Public Recording
Your Constitutional Right to Record
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the right to photograph, film, and record in public spaces. This right has been repeatedly affirmed by federal courts and extends to:
- Public streets, sidewalks, and parks
- Government buildings open to the public
- Public transportation facilities and vehicles
- Public events, protests, and demonstrations
- Police officers performing their duties in public
- Public officials conducting public business
No permit or special authorization is needed to record in these spaces, and government officials cannot impose prior restraints on recording absent exceptional circumstances.
Limits of the First Amendment Right
The right to record in public is not absolute. Restrictions may apply when:
- Recording on private property: Property owners can prohibit recording on their premises and ask you to leave.
- Recording interferes with government operations: You may be asked to step back from active crime scenes, emergency operations, or secure government facilities.
- Recording constitutes harassment or stalking: Repeatedly recording a specific individual in a manner that constitutes harassment may violate Washington's stalking statute (RCW 9A.46.110).
- Restricted areas: Certain government facilities (military bases, courtrooms in session, secure areas of airports) may restrict recording.
When Public Recording Becomes Private
The "Private Conversation" Threshold
Washington's Privacy Act under RCW 9.73.030 applies to "private" communications and conversations. A conversation can be private even if it takes place in a public location. The Washington Supreme Court addressed this in State v. Townsend, 147 Wn.2d 666 (2002), adopting a multi-factor test to determine whether a conversation is private:
- The subjective intention of the parties regarding privacy
- The duration and subject matter of the communication
- The location where the conversation takes place
- The presence of potential third parties who might overhear
- The relationship between the consenting and nonconsenting parties
Examples: Private vs. Non-Private in Public
| Scenario | Private? | Consent Required for Audio? |
|---|---|---|
| Two people talking loudly at a public rally | No | No |
| Two people whispering at a park bench, away from others | Likely yes | Yes |
| A person shouting on a street corner | No | No |
| A couple having a quiet conversation at a restaurant table | Likely yes | Yes |
| A person speaking on their phone in a crowded bus | Context-dependent | Depends on expectation |
| A public speech at a town hall meeting | No | No |
The key question is whether a reasonable person in the speaker's position would expect their words to be confined to the people they were addressing.
Recording Public Events
Protests and Demonstrations
You have a clear right to record protests, marches, and public demonstrations in Washington. This right has been reinforced by multiple court decisions and Department of Justice guidance. Key points:
- You may record from any public space where you have a legal right to be
- Police cannot order you to stop recording protests
- Other protesters cannot legally prevent you from recording in public
- You may livestream public demonstrations
Concerts, Festivals, and Entertainment Events
Public entertainment events present mixed rules:
- Public events on public property (street fairs, park concerts): Recording is generally permitted unless the organizer has obtained permits that restrict recording.
- Private events on private property (concerts at venues, ticketed events): The venue operator or event organizer can prohibit recording as a condition of entry. These restrictions are typically communicated through signage, ticket terms, or announcements.
- Intellectual property: Recording a live performance may violate copyright law separately from Washington recording law.
Public Meetings
Washington's Open Public Meetings Act (RCW 42.30) supports the public's right to record government meetings. Under RCW 42.30.220:
- Public agencies are encouraged to make audio or video recordings of all regular meetings
- Agencies should make recordings available online for at least six months
- Members of the public may record open public meetings
- A public body cannot prohibit recording of a meeting that is open to the public
The Journalist Exception
Special Rules for News Gathering
Washington provides a unique exception for journalists under RCW 9.73.030(1)(a). Employees of regularly published newspapers, magazines, wire services, radio stations, or television stations may record without making an announcement if:
- They are acting in a bona fide news gathering capacity
- They may be full-time, part-time, or contract employees
- Their recording device is "readily apparent or obvious" to the speakers
This means a journalist holding a visible microphone, camera, or recording device in a public setting can record conversations without separately announcing that recording is taking place. The equipment itself serves as the notice.
Who Qualifies as a Journalist?
The statute applies to employees of established media organizations. The exception may not cover:
- Independent bloggers without affiliation to a media organization
- Social media content creators without a news gathering purpose
- Citizen journalists who are not employed by a qualifying media outlet
However, the broader First Amendment right to record in public applies to everyone, regardless of journalistic credentials.
Recording in Specific Public Locations
Retail Stores and Businesses
Retail stores and businesses open to the public are private property, even though the public is invited in. The property owner sets the rules:
- The business can prohibit recording on its premises
- "No recording" policies must be communicated through signage or staff instructions
- If you are asked to stop recording and refuse, you may be asked to leave and could face trespass charges under RCW 9A.52.080 if you remain
- Audio recording of private conversations in the store requires all-party consent regardless of the store's policy
Restaurants and Bars
Similar rules apply to restaurants and bars:
- The establishment can prohibit recording on its premises
- Audio recording of private conversations between other patrons requires all-party consent
- Recording your own conversation at a table is legal if all participants consent
Public Transportation
Recording on public transportation in Washington (buses, light rail, ferries) is generally permitted in common passenger areas. However:
- Audio recording of private conversations between other passengers may trigger RCW 9.73.030
- Transit agencies may have policies regarding recording
- Recording in areas where passengers have a reasonable expectation of privacy (such as enclosed compartments) may be restricted
Parks and Recreational Areas
Recording in Washington's public parks and recreational areas is broadly permitted:
- Photography and videography in state parks managed by Washington State Parks is allowed for personal use
- Commercial photography and filming may require a permit from the managing agency
- Audio recording of private conversations between other park visitors requires consent
Government Buildings
Recording in government buildings that are open to the public is generally permitted in public areas:
- Lobbies, hallways, and public meeting rooms: Recording is allowed
- Courtrooms: Recording is typically controlled by the presiding judge and court rules. Washington courts have adopted specific rules governing electronic recording in courtrooms.
- Secure areas: Recording may be prohibited in secure areas such as jail facilities, evidence rooms, and restricted government offices
Drone Recording in Public
FAA and State Rules
Drone recording in public airspace is regulated by both federal and state law:
- The FAA regulates drone operations under 14 CFR Part 107
- Silent drone video over public spaces is generally permitted within FAA rules
- Drone audio that captures private conversations may trigger RCW 9.73.030
- Drone surveillance of private property where residents have a reasonable expectation of privacy may violate voyeurism and trespass laws
Local Drone Restrictions
Several Washington cities and parks have enacted local ordinances restricting drone flights. Check local rules before flying.
Penalties for Illegal Public Recording
Criminal Penalties
Recording a private conversation without consent, even in a public place, is a gross misdemeanor under RCW 9.73.080:
| Offense | Classification | Maximum Jail | Maximum Fine |
|---|---|---|---|
| Recording private conversation without consent | Gross Misdemeanor | 364 days | $5,000 |
| Disclosing an illegal recording | Gross Misdemeanor | 364 days | $5,000 |
Civil Liability
Under RCW 9.73.060, the recorded person may recover:
- Actual damages, including mental pain and suffering
- Liquidated damages of $100/day of violation (capped at $1,000)
- Reasonable attorney fees and costs
Inadmissibility
Under RCW 9.73.050, any recording obtained in violation of the Privacy Act is inadmissible in court.
More Washington Recording Laws
Audio Recording | Video Recording | Voyeurism & Hidden Cameras | Workplace Recording | Recording Police | Phone Call Recording | Security Cameras | Recording in Public | Landlord-Tenant | Dashcam Laws | Schools | Medical Recording
Back to Washington Recording Laws
More Washington Recording Topics
More Washington Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Is it legal to record in public in Washington?
Yes, video recording and photography in public spaces is generally legal under the First Amendment. However, audio recording of private conversations requires all-party consent under RCW 9.73.030, even if the conversation takes place in a public location. The key factor is whether the speakers had a reasonable expectation of privacy in their conversation.
Can I record someone in public without their permission in Washington?
You can take photos and silent video of people in public without their permission. However, recording the audio of a private conversation without consent from all parties violates RCW 9.73.030. If the conversation is not private, such as a public speech or a loud conversation easily overheard by passersby, no consent is needed.
Can I record a public meeting in Washington?
Yes. Washington's Open Public Meetings Act (RCW 42.30) protects your right to record public meetings of government bodies. Public agencies are encouraged to make their own recordings available online. A public body cannot prohibit recording of a meeting that is open to the public.
Can a store tell me I cannot record inside?
Yes. Retail stores and businesses are private property, even though they are open to the public. The business owner can prohibit recording on the premises. If you are asked to stop recording and refuse to leave, you could face trespass charges. However, you may record from public property such as the sidewalk outside the store.
Do journalists have special recording rights in Washington?
Yes. Under RCW 9.73.030, employees of established media organizations acting in a bona fide news gathering capacity may record without making an announcement, as long as their recording equipment is readily apparent or obvious to the speakers. This exception applies to full-time, part-time, and contract employees of newspapers, magazines, wire services, radio stations, and television stations.
Updates
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
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Revised Code of Washington
§ 9.73.030Intercepting, recording, or divulging private communication—Consent required—Exceptions.In forcecited in 41 of our articles
(1) Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, it shall be unlawful for any individual, partnership, corporation, association, or the state of Washington, its agencies, and political subdivisions to intercept, or record any: (a) Private communication transmitted by telephone, telegraph, radio, or other device between two or more individuals between points within or without the state by any device electronic or otherwise designed to record and/or transmit said communication regardless how such device is powered or actuated, without first obtaining the consent of all the participants in the communication; (b) Private conversation, by any device electronic or otherwise designed to record or transmit such conversation regardless how the device is powered or actuated without first obtaining the consent of all the persons engaged in the conversation.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at app.leg.wa.gov
Cited in 221 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Washington courts have policed what counts as a private communication under Sec. 9.73.030: State v. Gunwall (1986) concluded a pen register intercept comes within a private communication transmitted by telephone, while State v. Riley (1993) held a line trap that reveals only the calling number does not record one.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Salinas (Washington Supreme Court 1992, 119 Wash. 2d 192)“…alties for divulging a telegram or opening a sealed letter. RCW 9.73.030-.070, making it unlawful to intercept,…”
- State v. Gunwall (Washington Supreme Court 1986, 106 Wash. 2d 54)✓Everett police pulled a suspected cocaine dealer's toll records and put a pen register on her line without valid legal process; the court held a pen register intercept is a private communication transmitted by telephone, installable only under the eavesdropping statutes.
- State v. Brown (Washington Supreme Court 1997, 132 Wash. 2d 529)✓Palm Springs officers secretly recorded a Washington murder suspect's statements after his arrest; the court treated RCW 9.73.090, not 9.73.030, as the provision reaching recordings of arrested persons, and held the Privacy Act did not require suppressing that recording.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: US Recording Laws by State (2026): All 50 States Explained, Washington Recording Laws (2026): All-Party Consent Rules, Federal Wiretap Act and ECPA: The Complete Guide (2026)
§ 42.30.220Recording or online streaming by agency encouraged.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
(1) Public agencies are encouraged to make an audio or video recording of, or to provide an online streaming option for, all regular meetings of its governing body, and to make recordings of these meetings available online for a minimum of six months. (2) This section does not alter a local government's recordkeeping requirements under chapter 42.56 RCW.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at app.leg.wa.gov
Also relied on in: Washington Video Recording Laws: Filming, Surveillance, and Consent Rules (2026)
§ 9.73.050Admissibility of intercepted communication in evidence.In forcecited in 11 of our articles
Any information obtained in violation of RCW 9.73.030 or pursuant to any order issued under the provisions of RCW 9.73.040 shall be inadmissible in any civil or criminal case in all courts of general or limited jurisdiction in this state, except with the permission of the person whose rights have been violated in an action brought for damages under the provisions of RCW 9.73.030 through 9.73.080, or in a criminal action in which the defendant is charged with a crime, the commission of which would jeopardize national security.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at app.leg.wa.gov
Cited in 116 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Wanrow (Washington Supreme Court 1977, 88 Wash. 2d 221)“…epartment of an emergency telephone call, on the basis that RCW 9.73.050 and RCW 9.73.090 which authorize the re…”
- State v. Rupe (Washington Supreme Court 1984, 101 Wash. 2d 664)“…find that this statement violated the terms of the statute. RCW 9.73.050 provides that information obtained in v…”
- State v. Fjermestad (Washington Supreme Court 1990, 114 Wash. 2d 828)“…At the time RCW 9.73.040 was enacted, the Legislature added RCW 9.73.050 4 which deals with admissibility of *…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Washington Audio Recording Laws: Two-Party Consent Rules and Penalties (2026), Washington Dashcam Laws: Mounting Rules, Audio Recording, and Evidence (2026), Washington Medical Recording Laws: Recording Doctors, Hospitals, and Telehealth (2026)
§ 9.73.060Violating right of privacy—Civil action—Liability for damages.In forcecited in 14 of our articles
Any person who, directly or by means of a detective agency or any other agent, violates the provisions of this chapter shall be subject to legal action for damages, to be brought by any other person claiming that a violation of this statute has injured his or her business, his or her person, or his or her reputation. A person so injured shall be entitled to actual damages, including mental pain and suffering endured by him or her on account of violation of the provisions of this chapter, or liquidated damages computed at the rate of one hundred dollars a day for each day of violation, not to exceed one thousand dollars, and a reasonable attorney's fee and other costs of litigation.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at app.leg.wa.gov
Cited in 36 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Washington courts read RCW 9.73.060 as supplying civil damages only for conduct chapter 9.73 prohibits. Kearney v. Kearney (1999) held RCW 9.73.050 creates no civil liability for filing illegally recorded material. Dillon v. Seattle Deposition Reporters, LLC (2014) reversed summary judgment on secretly transcribed calls.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Wanrow (Washington Supreme Court 1977, 88 Wash. 2d 221)“…case under RCW 9.73.050; there is no civil liability under RCW 9.73.060; and, there is no criminal liability un…”
- Kearney v. Kearney (Court of Appeals of Washington 1999, 95 Wash. App. 405)✓A father sued a guardian ad litem, an evaluator and an attorney under RCW 9.73.060 for filing transcripts of calls with his children that his estranged wife taped; the court held the act creates liability only for recording or intercepting, not filing, and affirmed dismissal.
- Dillon v. Seattle Deposition Reporters, LLC (Court of Appeals of Washington 2014, 179 Wash. App. 41)“…act is a gross misdemeanor and is also actionable in tort. RCW 9.73.060, .080. “We engage in a four-pronged ana…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Washington Landlord-Tenant Recording and Surveillance Laws (2026), Washington Phone Call Recording Laws: Consent Rules and Exceptions (2026), Washington Voyeurism and Hidden Camera Laws: Penalties and Protections (2026)
§ 9.73.080Penalties.In forcecited in 16 of our articles
(1) Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, any person who violates RCW 9.73.030 is guilty of a gross misdemeanor. (2) Any person who knowingly alters, erases, or wrongfully discloses any recording in violation of RCW 9.73.090(1)(c) is guilty of a gross misdemeanor.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at app.leg.wa.gov
Cited in 13 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2023
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Wanrow (Washington Supreme Court 1977, 88 Wash. 2d 221)“…9.73.090, which opens with a waiver of RCW 9.73.030 through RCW 9.73.080, [9] i.e., the recording is not unlaw…”
- State v. Williams (Washington Supreme Court 1980, 94 Wash. 2d 531)✓ATF agents recorded a suspect's conversations with an informant and undercover agents with only one party's consent. The court assumed without deciding that the RCW 9.73.080 criminal penalty may not reach federal agents, but held the tapes were still inadmissible in state court.
- State v. Clark (Washington Supreme Court 2007, 916 P.2d 384)“…Violation of RCW 9.73.030 constitutes a gross misdemeanor, RCW 9.73.080, and may also result in civil liability…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Washington Security Camera Laws: Rules for Home and Business Surveillance (2026), Washington Workplace Recording Laws: Employee Rights and Employer Rules (2026), Washington Smart Glasses Recording Laws (2026)
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- RCW 9.73.030 - Intercepting, Recording, or Divulging Private Communications(app.leg.wa.gov).gov
- RCW 9.73.050 - Admissibility of Intercepted Communications(app.leg.wa.gov).gov
- RCW 9.73.060 - Civil Damages for Privacy Violations(app.leg.wa.gov).gov
- RCW 9.73.080 - Criminal Penalties(app.leg.wa.gov).gov
- RCW 42.30 - Open Public Meetings Act(app.leg.wa.gov).gov
- RCW 42.30.220 - Recording of Meetings Encouraged(app.leg.wa.gov).gov
- 14 CFR Part 107 - Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems(ecfr.gov).gov