Iowa
Iowa Video Recording Laws: Where You Can and Cannot Film (2026)
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 15, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of August 9, 2026. · 10 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content
Iowa permits video recording in any public space where no reasonable expectation of privacy exists. When a recording also captures audio, Iowa Code 808B.2 applies its one-party consent rule. Recording someone in a private setting without consent can constitute a criminal invasion of privacy under Iowa Code 709.21.
Iowa does not have a single comprehensive video recording statute. Instead, video recording is governed by a combination of constitutional protections, privacy statutes, trespass laws, and the audio interception rules in Iowa Code Chapter 808B. Whether your video recording is legal depends primarily on where you are filming, whether the recording captures audio, and the privacy expectations of the people being recorded.
This guide covers every major aspect of video recording law in Iowa, including public filming rights, private property restrictions, the trespass-recording law, voyeurism statutes, and how video evidence is treated in court.
Video Recording in Public Spaces
Constitutional Protections
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the right to record in public spaces. This protection extends to photography, video recording, and live streaming. The ACLU of Iowa confirms that taking photographs or recording video in public places is a constitutionally protected activity.
In public spaces, you can legally:
- Film on public streets, sidewalks, and parks
- Record public meetings and government proceedings
- Film protests, demonstrations, and public events
- Record interactions with government officials performing their duties
- Use a dashcam while driving on public roads
- Livestream from any public location
Open Meetings and Government Proceedings
Iowa's Open Meetings Law (Iowa Code Chapter 21) requires most government meetings to be open to the public. This includes city council meetings, county board of supervisors meetings, school board meetings, and state legislative proceedings. Video recording of open public meetings is generally permitted.
Closed sessions conducted under specific exemptions in Chapter 21 may not be recorded by the public. A governmental body must cite a specific exemption before going into closed session.
Limitations on Public Recording
Even in public spaces, some restrictions apply:
- You cannot block sidewalks, roadways, or emergency access while filming
- You cannot enter restricted government areas (secure courtrooms, military installations) without authorization
- You cannot use recording equipment that interferes with official operations
- You may be required to follow reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions
Video Recording on Private Property
General Rule: Property Owner Controls Recording
On private property, the property owner or occupant sets the rules for video recording. A business can prohibit filming inside its premises. A homeowner can prohibit recording on their property. If you are asked to stop recording on someone else's private property and refuse, you could face trespass charges.
However, employees who are lawfully present at their workplace are generally not trespassing. The trespass-recording law does not apply to people who have authorization to be on the property.
Iowa Code 709.21: Invasion of Privacy (Nudity)
Iowa Code 709.21 specifically addresses video recording in private settings. The statute is a crime only when ALL of the following are true at once:
- The recording is made for the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire
- The person being recorded does not or cannot consent
- The person is in a state of full or partial nudity
- The person has a reasonable expectation of privacy while in that state of nudity
All four elements must be present together. Recording a clothed person in a private space, even a bedroom or bathroom, does not by itself violate Section 709.21, though other legal theories such as trespass or intrusion upon seclusion may still apply. The statute does not contain a separate provision covering distribution or sharing of recordings; dissemination of nude or sexual imagery is instead addressed by a different statute, Iowa Code 708.7.
Penalties for violating Iowa Code 709.21:
| Offense | Classification | Maximum Penalty |
|---|---|---|
| Any violation of Iowa Code 709.21 | Aggravated misdemeanor | Up to 2 years in prison, $855 to $8,540 fine |
Iowa Code 709.21 does not contain a subsequent-offense felony enhancement or a separate distribution offense; every violation is graded as a single aggravated misdemeanor. Sharing nude or sexual imagery without consent may instead be prosecuted under Iowa Code 708.7 (harassment by dissemination of intimate images).
Areas Where Privacy Expectations Exist
Iowa courts recognize heightened privacy expectations in certain locations:
- Bathrooms and restrooms
- Locker rooms and changing areas
- Hotel rooms and guest bedrooms
- Medical examination rooms
- Any enclosed space where a person reasonably expects to be free from observation
Recording someone nude or partially nude in these areas without consent, for a sexual purpose, is illegal under Iowa Code 709.21. Recording a clothed person in these same spaces does not violate 709.21 by itself, though it can still expose the recorder to civil liability for intrusion upon seclusion, or to wiretap-law exposure under Iowa Code 808B.2 if audio of a conversation is captured.
Iowa's Trespass-Recording Law (HF 775)
What the Law Prohibits
In 2021, the Iowa legislature enacted House File 775, codified in Iowa Code 727.8A. This law creates enhanced penalties for placing a camera or electronic surveillance device on someone else's private property while trespassing. The statute was designed to address situations where individuals trespass onto agricultural operations to place hidden cameras, but its language applies broadly.
Under this law, it is illegal to:
- Place a camera, electronic surveillance device, or recording equipment on someone else's property without permission
- Use a drone to record over private property when the operator does not have authorization
- Trespass for the purpose of conducting surveillance or gathering recordings
Penalties Under HF 775
| Offense | Classification | Maximum Penalty |
|---|---|---|
| First offense | Aggravated misdemeanor | Up to 2 years in prison, $855 to $8,540 fine |
| Subsequent offenses | Class D felony | Up to 5 years in prison, $1,025 to $10,245 fine |
2024 Federal Court Decision
The Eighth Circuit upheld the constitutionality of Iowa's camera-while-trespassing statute (Iowa Code § 727.8A, the ag-gag law) in Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Reynolds, 89 F.4th 1071 (8th Cir. 2024). The court assumed, without deciding, that using a camera while trespassing is First Amendment-protected activity, then applied intermediate scrutiny and held the statute's Use Provision narrowly tailored to Iowa's privacy and property interests. It separately held that plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge the statute's Place Provision, so that half of the statute's constitutionality was not decided on the merits. This is a unique Iowa-specific recording restriction -- one of the few state ag-gag statutes to survive federal challenge -- and applies to anyone who enters an agricultural or commercial facility without authorization and places or operates a recording device there.
This ruling means the law remains enforceable. Individuals and organizations that trespass onto private property to conduct video surveillance face serious criminal penalties.
Who Is Not Affected
The trespass-recording law does not apply to:
- Property owners recording on their own property
- Employees who are lawfully present at their workplace
- Law enforcement officers acting under proper authority
- Individuals who have permission to be on the property
- People recording from public spaces (even if the recording captures activity on private property in the distance)
Video Recording With Audio: The One-Party Consent Connection
When Audio Changes the Legal Analysis
Pure video recording (without audio) is not covered by Iowa's wiretapping statute (Iowa Code 808B.2). Chapter 808B specifically addresses the interception of "wire, oral, or electronic communications." Silent video does not intercept a communication.
However, when your video recording also captures audio of conversations, the one-party consent rules apply. This means:
- If you are a participant in the conversation being recorded on video, one-party consent is satisfied
- If you are recording video of other people's conversations that you are not part of, capturing their audio could violate 808B.2
- Security cameras that record audio in addition to video must comply with the consent and monitoring device exceptions
Practical Implications
For most personal video recording situations, the audio component does not create legal issues because you are typically involved in any conversation being captured. The concern arises primarily with:
- Surveillance systems that capture conversations of third parties
- Hidden cameras with microphones in private spaces
- Drones equipped with audio recording capabilities flying near private conversations
Video Recording and Property Monitoring
Iowa Code 727.8 Monitoring Device Exception
Iowa's eavesdropping statute (Iowa Code 727.8) includes a specific exception for property owners and lessees who use monitoring devices on their own real property. This exception allows:
- Security cameras with audio on your own residential property
- Surveillance systems at your own business
- Ring doorbells, Nest cameras, and similar smart home devices on your property
- Monitoring systems in common areas of properties you own or lease
The exception applies to devices "placed on the real property owned or leased" by the person using them. It does not authorize placing monitoring devices on someone else's property.
Drone Video Recording
Iowa does not have a comprehensive state law specifically governing drone video recording. Drone operations are primarily regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). However, using a drone to record video can implicate several Iowa laws:
- Trespass-recording law: If a drone is flown over private property without authorization for surveillance purposes, HF 775 may apply
- Voyeurism statutes: Using a drone to record someone in a private area where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy could violate Iowa Code 709.21
- Harassment: Repeated drone surveillance could constitute harassment under Iowa Code 708.7
Video Evidence in Iowa Courts
Admissibility Standards
Video recordings are generally admissible as evidence in Iowa courts if they meet the following requirements:
- Authentication: The video must be shown to be a fair and accurate representation of what it purports to depict. Under Iowa Rule of Evidence 5.901, testimony that an item is what the proponent claims it to be is sufficient.
- Relevance: The video must relate to a fact at issue in the case
- Not unduly prejudicial: Under Iowa Rule of Evidence 5.403, a court may exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice
Chain of Custody
For video evidence to be reliable, maintaining a clear chain of custody is important. This includes:
- Preserving the original video file with metadata
- Documenting when and where the recording was made
- Identifying who had access to the recording
- Noting any copies or transfers of the file
Illegally Obtained Video
Video recordings obtained through illegal means (such as trespass or voyeurism) may be excluded from evidence. The court will consider the circumstances of how the recording was obtained and whether admitting it would violate the defendant's rights or public policy.
Common Video Recording Scenarios
Can I Film My Neighbor's Property From My Own Yard?
You can generally record video from your own property, even if the camera captures portions of your neighbor's property that are visible from your vantage point. There is no expectation of privacy in areas visible from public spaces or neighboring properties. However, you cannot:
- Aim cameras specifically at your neighbor's windows or private areas
- Use telephoto lenses or similar equipment to see into areas not normally visible
- Position cameras to capture activity inside your neighbor's home
Can I Record Video at a Business?
If you are a customer or visitor at a business, the business owner controls whether recording is allowed on their premises. Some businesses prohibit photography and video recording. If you are asked to stop recording and refuse, you may be asked to leave and could face trespass charges if you do not comply.
Can I Record Video of Construction or Repair Work?
Yes. If you hire contractors to work on your property, you can record the work being performed. This can be valuable for documenting quality issues, safety violations, or disputes about the scope of work. If you are having work done at a rented property, your rights as a lessee under Iowa Code 727.8 allow you to use monitoring devices on your leased property.
Can I Record Video in a Courtroom?
Iowa courts generally restrict video recording during court proceedings. The Iowa Supreme Court has rules governing media coverage of court proceedings. Permission from the presiding judge is typically required before video recording in a courtroom. Contact the court clerk for specific rules about recording in a particular courthouse.
More Iowa Recording Laws
Audio Recording | Video Recording | Voyeurism and Hidden Cameras | Workplace Recording | Recording Police | Phone Call Recording | Security Cameras | Recording in Public | Landlord-Tenant Recording | Dashcam Laws | School Recording | Medical Recording
More Iowa Recording Topics
More Iowa Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Is it legal to video record in public in Iowa?
Yes. Iowa has no general law prohibiting video recording in public spaces. Filming on public streets, sidewalks, parks, and at public meetings is constitutionally protected activity. The ACLU of Iowa confirms that taking photographs or recording video in public places is protected under the First Amendment.
Can I be charged for recording video on someone else's property in Iowa?
Yes, if you are trespassing. Iowa's trespass-recording law (HF 775) creates enhanced penalties for placing cameras or surveillance devices on someone else's property while trespassing. A first offense is an aggravated misdemeanor (up to 2 years in prison), and subsequent offenses are a Class D felony (up to 5 years).
Does Iowa's wiretapping law apply to video recording?
Iowa Code 808B.2 applies to the interception of communications, not to pure video. Silent video recording is not covered by the wiretapping statute. However, when video recording also captures audio of conversations, the one-party consent rules under 808B.2 apply to the audio component.
What is the penalty for recording someone without consent in a private space in Iowa?
Recording someone in a state of full or partial nudity without consent, for a sexual purpose, in a place where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy, violates Iowa Code 709.21, an aggravated misdemeanor punishable by up to 2 years in prison and fines between $855 and $8,540. All of those elements must be present together; recording a clothed person does not violate 709.21 by itself. The statute does not have a separate distribution offense; sharing nude or sexual imagery without consent is instead covered by Iowa Code 708.7.
Can I use video recordings as evidence in Iowa courts?
Yes, if the recording was legally obtained. Video evidence must be authenticated as genuine, relevant to the case, and not unduly prejudicial. Under Iowa Rule of Evidence 5.901, testimony that the video is what it claims to be is sufficient for authentication. Illegally obtained video recordings may be excluded.
Updates
Corrected the description of Iowa Code 709.21 to match its actual text: it applies only when a recording is made for a sexual purpose of a nonconsenting, nude or partially nude person with a reasonable expectation of privacy, not to any private-space recording regardless of nudity, and it does not have a separate distribution offense. Removed a fabricated felony-enhancement row for repeat 709.21 violations. Corrected the description of the Eighth Circuit's Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Reynolds ruling on Iowa's camera-while-trespassing law: the court assumed the conduct was First Amendment-protected and upheld only the statute's Use Provision under intermediate scrutiny, leaving the separate Place Provision undecided for lack of standing.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Fixed the Class D felony fine in the trespass-recording penalty table ($1,025-$10,245 per Iowa Code 902.9, not $750-$7,500), and corrected House File 775's codification -- it is Iowa Code 727.8A (the ag-gag camera-while-trespassing statute), not 716.7A (a food-operation trespass statute with no camera provisions), matching the article's own later, correct reference to 727.8A.
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.
Iowa Code, Chapter 709: SEXUAL ABUSE
§ 709.21Invasion of privacy — nudity.In forcecited in 12 of our articles
1. A person who knowingly views, photographs, or films another person, for the purpose of arousing or gratifying the sexual desire of any person, commits invasion of privacy if all of the following apply: a. The other person does not consent or is unable to consent to being viewed, photographed, or filmed. b. The other person is in a state of full or partial nudity. c. The other person has a reasonable expectation of privacy while in a state of full or partial nudity. 2. As used in this section: a. “Full or partial nudity” means the showing of any part of the human genitals or pubic area or buttocks, or any part of the nipple of the breast of a female, with less than fully opaque covering. b. “Photographs or films” means the making of any photograph, motion picture film, videotape, or any other recording or transmission of the image of a person. 3. A person who violates this section commits an aggravated misdemeanor.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legis.iowa.gov
Cited in 19 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Iowa courts apply section 709.21 element by element. State of Iowa v. Nathaniel Wade Marchant affirmed a conviction on circumstantial proof of hidden bedroom cameras; State of Iowa v. Paul Andrew Monahan reversed, finding no objectively reasonable expectation of privacy at open public restroom urinals.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State of Iowa v. Paul Andrew Monahan (Court of Appeals of Iowa 2018, 919 N.W.2d 635)✓A man was convicted under section 709.21 for allegedly looking at teenage boys at urinals in a public restroom at a track meet; the court reversed, finding no objectively reasonable expectation of privacy at those open urinals and insufficient evidence of a sexual purpose.
- Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board v. Templeton (Supreme Court of Iowa 2010, 784 N.W.2d 761)✓A lawyer repeatedly peered into women's bedroom and bathroom windows and pleaded guilty to six counts of invasion of privacy under section 709.21; the court did not interpret the statute but held those convictions reflected adversely on his fitness to practice law.
- State of Iowa v. Nathaniel Wade Marchant (Court of Appeals of Iowa 2026)✓The mother's live-in partner hid a camera in her 13-year-old daughter's bedroom, and over 1,000 nude images were found on his phones; the court held the circumstantial evidence sufficed to sustain his invasion-of-privacy conviction under section 709.21(1).
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Iowa Code, Chapter 727: HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE
§ 727.8Electronic and mechanical eavesdropping.In forcecited in 15 of our articles
1. “Monitoring device” means a digital video or audio streaming or recording device that records, listens to, or otherwise intercepts video or audio communications in order to provide proof of or prevent criminal activity that is placed outside of a person’s dwelling or other structure that is not in a shared hallway and is on real property owned or leased by the person. 2. Any person, having no right or authority to do so, who taps into or connects a listening or recording device to any telephone or other communication wire, or who by any electronic or mechanical means listens to, records, or otherwise intercepts a conversation or communication of any kind, commits a serious misdemeanor. 3. This section does not apply to any of the following: a. The recording by a sender or recipient of a message or one who is openly present and participating in or listening to a communication from recording such message or communication. b. The use of any radio or television receiver to receive any communication transmitted by radio or wireless signal. c. The use of a monitoring device.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legis.iowa.gov
Cited in 8 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2024
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):State v. Reid (1986) read the section's exception to let a sender, recipient, or person openly present and participating record a conversation without all-party consent or a court order. State v. Philpott (2005) affirmed a conviction for leaving a voice-activated recorder running in an office during the defendant's absence.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Philpott (Supreme Court of Iowa 2005, 702 N.W.2d 500)✓A court clerk left a voice-activated recorder running on her desk while at lunch, capturing coworkers; the court affirmed her section 727.8 conviction, holding a jury could find she intended to record conversations that took place during her absence.
- State v. Reid (Supreme Court of Iowa 1986, 394 N.W.2d 399)✓Police had a ten-year-old girl call the defendant and taped the call, then videotaped his station interview without telling him; the court held both recordings fell within section 727.8's exception for a participant, so no court order or all-party consent was needed.
- State v. Fox (Supreme Court of Iowa 1992, 493 N.W.2d 829)✓A deputy monitored a county jail inmate's outgoing phone call, and what she said led to a cell search that turned up marijuana; the court held the right or authority to monitor under section 727.8 comes from chapter 808B, whose law-enforcement exception covered him.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 727.8ACameras or electronic surveillance devices — trespass.In forcecited in 9 of our articles
A person committing a trespass as defined in section 716.7 who knowingly places or uses a camera or electronic surveillance device that transmits or records images or data while the device is on the trespassed property commits an aggravated misdemeanor for a first offense and a class “D” felony for a second or subsequent offense.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legis.iowa.gov
Cited in 2 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Kimberly Reynolds (Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit 2024, 89 F.4th 1071)“…or data while the device is on the trespassed property[.]” Iowa Code § 727.8A (“the Act”). Five animal-welfare groups…”
- Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement v. Kimberly Reynolds (Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit 2026)“…animal-welfare groups sued several Iowa officials, alleging Iowa Code § 727.8A violates their members’ First Amendment…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Iowa Code, Chapter 808B: INTERCEPTION OF COMMUNICATIONS
§ 808B.2Unlawful acts — penalty.In forcecited in 18 of our articles
1. Except as otherwise specifically provided in this chapter, a person who does any of the following commits a class “D” felony: a. Willfully intercepts, endeavors to intercept, or procures any other person to intercept or endeavor to intercept, a wire, oral, or electronic communication. b. Willfully uses, endeavors to use, or procures any other person to use or endeavor to use an electronic, mechanical, or other device to intercept any oral communication when either of the following applies: (1) The device is affixed to, or otherwise transmits a signal through, a wire, cable, or other like connection used in wire communication. (2) The device transmits communications by radio, or interferes with the transmission of radio communications. c. Willfully discloses, or endeavors to disclose, to any other person the contents of a wire, oral, or electronic communication, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through the interception of a wire, oral, or electronic communication in violation of this subsection. d.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legis.iowa.gov
Cited in 10 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2017
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Iowa courts have applied 808B.2 to covert recordings by private parties. State v. Spencer (2007) read its one-party consent exception to include vicarious consent, but only where a parent has a good faith, objectively reasonable basis for consenting for a minor child. Papillon v. Jones (2017) applied it to a hidden home recorder.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Brenda Papillon v. Bryon Jones (Supreme Court of Iowa 2017, 892 N.W.2d 763)✓A man left a hidden voice-activated recorder in his ex-girlfriend's home and captured her private phone calls, then used them in their custody case; the court affirmed liability under Section 808B.2 but held punitive damages require proof he knew he was violating the chapter.
- Amended June 6, 2017 Brenda Papillon v. Bryon Jones (Supreme Court of Iowa 2017)“…n in district court against Jones, alleging a violation of Iowa Code section 808B.2, which prohibits “willfully intercept[…”
- Iowa Beta Chapter of Phi Delta Theta Fraternity v. State, University of Iowa (Supreme Court of Iowa 2009, 763 N.W.2d 250)✓A nonmember hid a recorder in a fraternity's private meeting room and gave the tape to university officials who used it to discipline the chapter; the court held the tape was a protected oral communication and read "willfully" in Section 808B.2 to mean purposeful conduct.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Iowa Code, Chapter 902: FELONIES
§ 902.9Maximum sentence for felons.In forcecited in 7 of our articles
1. The maximum sentence for any person convicted of a felony shall be that prescribed by statute or, if not prescribed by statute, if other than a class “A” felony shall be determined as follows: a. Reserved. b. A class “B” felon shall be confined for no more than twenty-five years. c. An habitual offender shall be confined for no more than fifteen years. d. A class “C” felon, not an habitual offender, shall be confined for no more than ten years, and in addition shall be sentenced to a fine of at least one thousand three hundred seventy dollars but not more than thirteen thousand six hundred sixty dollars. e. A class “D” felon, not an habitual offender, shall be confined for no more than five years, and in addition shall be sentenced to a fine of at least one thousand twenty-five dollars but not more than ten thousand two hundred forty-five dollars. 2. The surcharges required by sections 911.1, 911.2A, and 911.5 shall be added to a fine imposed on a class “C” or class “D” felon, as provided by those sections, and are not a part of or subject to the maximums set in this section.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legis.iowa.gov
Cited in 166 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State of Iowa v. Andre Letroy Antwan Harrington (Supreme Court of Iowa 2017)“…a sentence of incarceration greater than one year. See Iowa Code § 902.9(1)(a)–(e). Thus, any immigrati…”
- State v. Ayers (Supreme Court of Iowa 1999, 590 N.W.2d 25)“…imposed a $500 fine for each conviction. See Iowa Code §§ 902.9 (3), 903.1(2). Ayers appeals onl…”
- State v. Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County (Supreme Court of Iowa 2000, 616 N.W.2d 575)“…of incarceration not to exceed ten years. See Iowa Code § 902.9 (setting forth a maximum sentence of t…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
United States Code Title 18
§ 2511Interception and disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications prohibitedIn forcecited in 418 of our articles
Except as otherwise specifically provided in this chapter any person who— intentionally intercepts, endeavors to intercept, or procures any other person to intercept or endeavor to intercept, any wire, oral, or electronic communication; intentionally uses, endeavors to use, or procures any other person to use or endeavor to use any electronic, mechanical, or other device to intercept any oral communication when— such device is affixed to, or otherwise transmits a signal through, a wire, cable, or other like connection used in wire communication; or such device transmits communications by radio, or interferes with the transmission of such communication; or such person knows, or has reason to know, that such device or any component thereof has been sent through the mail or transported in interstate or foreign commerce; or such use or endeavor to use (A) takes place on the premises of any business or other commercial establishment the operations of which affect interstate or foreign commerce; or (B) obtains or is for the purpose of obtaining information relating to the operations of any business or other commercial establishment the operations of which affect interstate or foreign…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 2,045 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Griggs-Ryan v. Smith (1990) applied the Section 2511(2)(d) prior-consent exception, treating a tenant repeatedly told that all incoming calls were taped as having impliedly consented. United States v. United States District Court (1972) read the then-current Section 2511(3) as conferring no presidential surveillance power.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Mitchell v. Forsyth (Supreme Court of the United States 1985, 472 U.S. 511)✓The Attorney General authorized a warrantless 1970 national security wiretap that caught the plaintiff's calls; the Court held the since-repealed Section 2511(3) disclaimer left the tap lawful under Title III, and that Mitchell had qualified immunity.
- United States v. United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan (Supreme Court of the United States 1972, 407 U.S. 297)✓The Attorney General approved warrantless wiretaps on members of a domestic group accused of bombing a CIA office; the Court read Section 2511(3) as a congressional disclaimer conferring no surveillance power, then held the Fourth Amendment required prior judicial approval.
- Forsyth v. Barr (Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit 1994, 19 F.3d 1527)✓Dallas police used, in an internal affairs probe of an officer, calls private parties allegedly intercepted illegally; assuming that was unlawful, the Fifth Circuit held Section 2517(1) and (2) allowed the disclosure and use, defeating the Section 2511(1)(c) and (d) claims.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Explore the law
This article also draws on these acts and chapters (opening at their first section): Iowa Code, Chapter 808B: INTERCEPTION OF COMMUNICATIONS § 808B.1 (Definitions.) · Iowa Code, Chapter 911: SURCHARGE ADDED TO CRIMINAL PENALTIES § 911.1 (Crime services surcharge.) · Iowa Code, Chapter 21: OFFICIAL MEETINGS OPEN TO PUBLIC § 21.1 (Intent — declaration of policy.)
Related law for further reading — not part of this article’s citations.
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- Iowa Code Chapter 808B - Interception of Communications(legis.iowa.gov).gov
- Iowa Code 808B.2 - Unlawful Acts and Penalty(legis.iowa.gov).gov
- Iowa Code 727.8 - Electronic and Mechanical Eavesdropping(legis.iowa.gov).gov
- Iowa Code 727.8A - Trespass with camera or electronic surveillance device(legis.iowa.gov).gov
- Iowa Code 709.21 - Invasion of Privacy (Nudity)(legis.iowa.gov).gov
- Iowa Code 902.9 - Maximum Sentence for Felons(legis.iowa.gov).gov
- Iowa Code Chapter 911 - Surcharge Added to Criminal Penalties(legis.iowa.gov).gov
- Iowa Rule of Evidence 5.901 - Authenticating or Identifying Evidence(legis.iowa.gov).gov
- 18 U.S.C. 2511 - Federal Wiretap Act(law.cornell.edu)
- Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Reynolds, 89 F.4th 1071 (8th Cir. 2024) - Iowa ag-gag upheld(law.justia.com)
- Iowa Code Chapter 21 - Open Meetings(legis.iowa.gov).gov
- ACLU of Iowa - Taking Photos or Videos in Iowa(aclu-ia.org)
- FAA - Unmanned Aircraft Systems (Drones)(faa.gov).gov