Louisiana
Louisiana Video Recording Laws: Surveillance Rules and Privacy Limits
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 15, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of August 7, 2026. · 8 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content
Louisiana allows video recording in public spaces without restriction. When video also captures audio, Louisiana's one-party consent rule under La. R.S. 15:1303 governs the audio component. Recording in private places where people have a reasonable expectation of privacy is a criminal offense under La. R.S. 14:283.
Louisiana allows video recording in most public settings without restriction. There is no state law that prohibits filming on public streets, in parks, at government buildings, or in other open areas. The legal boundaries appear when recording moves into private spaces where people have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
This guide covers the full scope of Louisiana's video recording laws, from your rights to film in public to the serious criminal penalties for video voyeurism and nonconsensual image sharing. Understanding where the line falls between lawful recording and criminal conduct is essential for anyone who uses cameras, smartphones, security systems, or body-worn devices in Louisiana.
Video Recording in Public Spaces
Your Right to Film in Public
Louisiana does not have a statute that restricts video recording in public spaces. You can legally:
- Film on public streets, sidewalks, and highways
- Record in public parks and recreational areas
- Video record at government buildings and public meetings
- Use a camera in shopping centers, restaurants, and other businesses open to the public (subject to the property owner's rules)
- Record public protests, demonstrations, and gatherings
- Film from your own property, including areas visible from your property
The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects the right to gather information in public spaces, including through photography and video recording. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which covers Louisiana, has recognized this right in the context of recording law enforcement officers performing their duties.
Limitations on Public Recording
While public recording is broadly permitted, some limitations apply:
- Private property rules. Business owners and property managers can restrict recording on their premises. A store can ask you to stop filming and ask you to leave. Refusing to leave after being asked becomes trespassing.
- Government facilities. Some government buildings, particularly courthouses and military installations, may have specific rules about recording. Always check posted signs and follow instructions from security personnel.
- Interference with operations. You cannot use your recording activity as a pretext to interfere with law enforcement, emergency responders, or other official operations.
Video Voyeurism Laws in Louisiana
La. R.S. 14:283 Overview
Louisiana's video voyeurism statute under La. R.S. 14:283 is the primary law governing unauthorized video recording in private settings. The statute prohibits using any camera, video recorder, or other image recording device to observe, photograph, or record a person without that person's knowledge and consent in any place where that person would have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
The law specifically targets:
- Recording through windows or openings into private residences
- Using devices to look under clothing or through clothing in public or private settings
- Recording in bathrooms, locker rooms, and dressing rooms without consent
- Any surreptitious recording of a person in a private setting where they reasonably expect not to be observed
What Constitutes a "Reasonable Expectation of Privacy"
Louisiana courts consider several factors when determining whether a person had a reasonable expectation of privacy:
- Location. Bathrooms, bedrooms, hotel rooms, dressing rooms, and medical examination rooms are classic examples of places with high privacy expectations.
- Context. A person undressing in a locked bedroom has a stronger privacy expectation than someone changing in an open office.
- Visibility. If the recorded activity was visible to the general public without the use of enhancement devices, the privacy expectation may be diminished.
- Precautions taken. Actions like closing doors, drawing curtains, or moving to a secluded area demonstrate an expectation of privacy.
Penalties for Video Voyeurism
The penalties under La. R.S. 14:283 escalate based on the offense, whether explicit sexual content is depicted, and the age of the victim:
| Offense | Fine | Imprisonment |
|---|---|---|
| First conviction | Up to $2,000 | Up to 2 years |
| Second or subsequent | Up to $2,000 | 6 months to 3 years at hard labor (no parole) |
| Sexual content depicted (any victim age) | Up to $10,000 | 1 to 5 years at hard labor (no parole) |
| Victim under 17 with sexual intent | Up to $10,000 | 2 to 10 years at hard labor (no parole) |
Every conviction for video voyeurism under La. R.S. 14:283 triggers mandatory sex offender registration requirements. This registration obligation applies regardless of whether the offense involved a minor.
Nonconsensual Disclosure of Intimate Images
La. R.S. 14:283.2 Overview
Louisiana criminalizes the nonconsensual disclosure of private intimate images under La. R.S. 14:283.2. This law, sometimes called Louisiana's "revenge porn" statute, makes it illegal to intentionally disclose an image of another identifiable person who is engaged in a sexual act or whose intimate parts are exposed when:
- The person depicted has not consented to the disclosure
- The person disclosing the image obtained it under circumstances where the depicted person had a reasonable expectation of privacy
- The person disclosing knows or should know that the disclosure could cause harm to the depicted person
Penalties for Nonconsensual Disclosure
| Offense | Fine | Imprisonment |
|---|---|---|
| First offense | Up to $10,000 | Up to 2 years |
| Combined | Fine and imprisonment together | At the court's discretion |
Victims of nonconsensual image disclosure can also pursue civil remedies, including actual damages, attorney fees, and injunctive relief to have the images removed.
Exceptions to the Nonconsensual Disclosure Law
La. R.S. 14:283.2 includes exceptions for:
- Disclosures made by a criminal justice agency for the purpose of a lawful criminal investigation
- Disclosures made for the purpose of, or in connection with, reporting unlawful conduct to law enforcement or a criminal justice agency
- Images that the depicted person voluntarily or knowingly exposed in a public setting
- Disclosures related to a matter of public interest, public concern, or a public figure
AI-Generated Intimate Images and Deepfakes
La. R.S. 14:73.13 and 14:73.14
Louisiana enacted landmark deepfake legislation through 2023 La. Act 457 (SB 175), codified at La. R.S. 14:73.13. A separate statute, La. R.S. 14:73.14, was added later by 2024 La. Act 142. Together these are among the harshest deepfake regimes in the country, though their penalties differ sharply:
- La. R.S. 14:73.13 criminalizes AI-generated or digitally manipulated intimate sexual imagery of a minor. Creating or possessing such material carries 5 to 20 years at hard labor and a fine up to $10,000; distributing it (or distributing similar material depicting a nonconsenting adult) carries 10 to 30 years at hard labor and a fine up to $50,000.
- La. R.S. 14:73.14 criminalizes disseminating or selling an AI-generated video or image that depicts another person nude or in a state of undress without that person's authorization; it does not address elections. This offense is far less severe than 14:73.13: a violation is punishable by up to 6 months in jail, a fine of up to $750, or both.
Federal: TAKE IT DOWN Act (2026)
The federal TAKE IT DOWN Act, signed into law on May 19, 2026, requires online platforms to remove nonconsensual intimate imagery (including AI-generated deepfakes) within 48 hours of a verified victim request. This federal mandate layers on top of Louisiana's state criminal law remedies. Victims now have both criminal prosecution pathways and a platform-level takedown right.
Video Recording and Audio: Different Rules Apply
The One-Party Consent Audio Component
When your video recording also captures audio, Louisiana's wiretapping statute La. R.S. 15:1303 comes into play. Louisiana is a one-party consent state for audio recording, meaning you can record conversations you participate in without informing others.
However, if your video camera is capturing conversations between other people that you are not part of, the audio component may violate the wiretapping statute even if the video component is lawful. For example:
- A security camera with audio in your business. The video is generally legal in common areas, but the audio recording of customer conversations where you are not a participant could raise issues under La. R.S. 15:1303.
- A dashcam with audio. Recording your own conversations inside your vehicle is fine. Capturing conversations of people outside your vehicle from a parked dashcam could be problematic.
Best Practices for Combined Audio-Video Recording
- Disable audio recording on security cameras in areas where you do not participate in conversations
- Post clear signage informing people they are being recorded if you capture audio in business settings
- Ensure your participation in any conversation being audio recorded
Surveillance Cameras on Private Property
Residential Surveillance
Louisiana homeowners can install security cameras on their own property. Legal guidelines include:
- You can point cameras at your own property. Doorbell cameras, driveway cameras, and backyard cameras are all permissible.
- You can capture public areas visible from your property. A camera that records the street in front of your home is legal.
- You cannot point cameras into a neighbor's private spaces. Aiming a camera at a neighbor's bedroom window, bathroom, or fenced backyard where they have a privacy expectation may violate La. R.S. 14:283.
Business Surveillance
Louisiana businesses can use surveillance cameras throughout their premises with some restrictions:
- Common areas. Cameras in lobbies, hallways, retail floors, parking lots, and warehouses are generally permitted.
- Restricted areas. Cameras in bathrooms, locker rooms, changing areas, and break rooms where employees have privacy expectations are prohibited under La. R.S. 14:283.
- Employee notification. While not strictly required by Louisiana state law for video-only surveillance, notifying employees about camera locations is a best practice that reduces legal risk.
Drones and Aerial Video Recording
Louisiana enacted drone-specific legislation under La. R.S. 14:337 that addresses the use of unmanned aircraft systems. The statute makes it illegal to use a drone to conduct surveillance of, gather evidence about, or photographically or electronically record a defined targeted facility (including petroleum and alumina refineries, chemical and rubber manufacturing facilities, nuclear power plants, schools, critical infrastructure, and grain elevators) without the prior written consent of the facility's owner. It does not create a general prohibition on using a drone to record ordinary residential property or private individuals.
Key provisions include:
- First offense: Fine of up to $500 and imprisonment for up to 6 months
- Second or subsequent offense: Fine of $500 to $4,000 and imprisonment (with or without hard labor) of 6 months to 2 years
- Using a drone to commit voyeurism: Subject to the enhanced penalties under La. R.S. 14:283
Federal Aviation Administration rules also apply to drone operations in Louisiana, including registration requirements, altitude restrictions, and no-fly zones near airports.
Body Cameras and Wearable Recording Devices
Personal Use
You can wear a body camera or other wearable recording device in Louisiana. The legality of the recording depends on:
- Location. Public spaces are generally fine. Private spaces require consent considerations.
- Audio capture. If your body camera records audio, the one-party consent rule under La. R.S. 15:1303 applies. You can record conversations you are part of.
- Privacy expectations. Recording in areas where people have reasonable privacy expectations (such as inside someone's home) may raise issues under La. R.S. 14:283.
Law Enforcement Body Cameras
Louisiana has addressed law enforcement body cameras through La. R.S. 44:3(A)(8)(b), which governs public records access to body camera footage. Under this provision, body camera recordings are not automatically public records but may be disclosed through a formal request process. Family members of individuals captured in body camera footage have certain access rights.
Using Video Recordings as Evidence
Admissibility in Court
Video recordings are admissible in Louisiana courts when they are:
- Lawfully obtained. The recording must not violate La. R.S. 14:283 or any other privacy statute.
- Authenticated. A witness must testify that the video accurately depicts what it claims to show.
- Relevant. The video must relate to a matter at issue in the case.
- Not unfairly prejudicial. The court may exclude video whose prejudicial impact substantially outweighs its probative value.
Chain of Custody
Maintaining a clear chain of custody strengthens the evidentiary value of video recordings. Document:
- When the recording was made and by what device
- Who has had access to the recording
- How the recording has been stored and protected from tampering
- Whether any copies were made and for what purpose
More Louisiana 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 Louisiana Recording Laws
More Louisiana Recording Topics
More Louisiana Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Is it legal to video record in public in Louisiana?
Yes. Louisiana has no general prohibition on video recording in public spaces. You can freely film on streets, sidewalks, parks, and other public areas. The First Amendment protects this right.
What is video voyeurism under Louisiana law?
Video voyeurism under La. R.S. 14:283 is the use of any camera or image recording device to observe or record a person without their consent in a place where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy. It is a criminal offense that can require sex offender registration.
What are the penalties for revenge porn in Louisiana?
Under La. R.S. 14:283.2, nonconsensual disclosure of intimate images carries penalties of up to $10,000 in fines and up to 2 years in prison. Victims can also pursue civil remedies including actual damages and attorney fees.
Can I use a drone for video recording in Louisiana?
You can use a drone for video recording in Louisiana, but La. R.S. 14:337 prohibits using a drone to surveil or record specific targeted facilities (such as refineries, chemical plants, nuclear facilities, schools, critical infrastructure, and grain elevators) without the facility owner's written consent. It does not generally restrict droning ordinary private property. First offense carries up to $500 in fines and 6 months imprisonment; a second or subsequent offense carries $500 to $4,000 in fines and 6 months to 2 years imprisonment. FAA regulations also apply.
Do video recordings need to include audio notification in Louisiana?
Video-only recordings do not require notification under Louisiana law in most contexts. However, if your camera also captures audio, the one-party consent rule under La. R.S. 15:1303 applies to the audio component. You must be a party to any conversation being recorded.
Updates
Rebuilt the video voyeurism penalty table to show all four statutory tiers -- it previously omitted the tier for explicit sexual content depicted regardless of victim age. Also fixed a broken body-camera public-records citation link and corrected which 2024 act created the AI-image-dissemination statute along with its actual (much lower) penalty.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources
Corrected the drone-surveillance statute description (La. R.S. 14:337 protects defined critical-infrastructure 'targeted facilities,' not general private property), fixed the second-offense drone penalty, the body-camera public-records citation (44:3(A)(8)(b), not (A)(4)(b)), the 14:283.2 exceptions list (no medical-treatment exception exists), and the deepfake statute descriptions (14:73.14 covers nude AI imagery, not elections; 14:73.13's harsher 10-30 year range applies to distribution, not mere creation/possession of a minor deepfake).
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.
Louisiana Revised Statutes
§ 14:283Video voyeurism; penaltiesIn forcecited in 30 of our articles
A. Video voyeurism is any of the following: (1) The use of any camera, videotape, photo-optical, photo-electric, or any other image recording device, or an unmanned aircraft system equipped with any camera, videotape, photo-optical, photo-electric, or any other image recording device, for the purpose of observing, viewing, photographing, filming, or videotaping a person where that person has not consented to the specific instance of observing, viewing, photographing, filming, or videotaping and either: (a) It is for a lewd or lascivious purpose. (b) The observing, viewing, photographing, filming, or videotaping is as described in Paragraph (B)(3) of this Section and occurs in a place where an identifiable person has a reasonable expectation of privacy. (2) The transfer of an image obtained by activity described in Paragraph (1) of this Subsection by live or recorded telephone message, electronic mail, the Internet, or a commercial online service.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legis.la.gov
Cited in 16 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2024
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):In State v. Schaller (2009) a Louisiana appeals court set out the elements of La. R.S. 14:283 and, since the statute does not define lewd or lascivious, applied a definition of an act tending to excite lust, rejecting a claimed babysitting reason for a hidden bedroom camera. State v. Boudreaux (2006) found 56 consecutive years excessive.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Batiste (Supreme Court of Louisiana 2006, 939 So. 2d 1245)“…Batiste, charging him with video voyeurism, a violation of La. R.S. 14:283. [1] At his arraignment on December *…”
- State v. Boudreaux (Louisiana Court of Appeal 2006, 945 So. 2d 898)✓A stepfather hid a wireless camera in his 18-year-old stepdaughter's bedroom and taped her for four months. He pleaded guilty to 14 counts of video voyeurism, and the court vacated the 56-year consecutive sentence as excessive because the acts formed a single scheme.
- State v. Perry (Louisiana Court of Appeal 2012, 12 La.App. 3 Cir. 298)✓A houseguest was secretly videotaped drying off in the family's guest bathroom. The court affirmed the video voyeurism conviction and three-year sentence, addressing only whether the untimely pretrial motions were properly denied, not the reach of the statute.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 14:283.2Nonconsensual disclosure of a private imageIn forcecited in 9 of our articles
A. A person commits the offense of nonconsensual disclosure of a private image when all of the following occur: (1) The person intentionally discloses an image of another person who is identifiable from the image or information displayed in connection with the image and either whose intimate parts are exposed in whole or in part or who is engaged in sexual conduct. (2) The person who discloses the image obtained it through unauthorized access or under circumstances in which a reasonable person would know or understand that the image was to remain private. (3) The person who discloses the image knew or should have known that the person in the image did not consent to the disclosure of the image. (4) The person who discloses the image knew or should have known that the disclosure could harass or cause emotional distress to the person in the image. B. Disclosure of an image under any of the following circumstances does not constitute commission of the offense defined in Subsection A of this Section: (1) When the disclosure is made by any criminal justice agency for the purpose of a criminal investigation that is otherwise lawful.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legis.la.gov
Cited in 2 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2017
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Goodie (Louisiana Court of Appeal 2017, 17 La.App. 3 Cir. 693)“…arges for nonconsensual disclosure of a private image under La.R.S. 14:283.2. The narrative portion of the police…”
- State of Louisiana v. Travis R. Goodie (Louisiana Court of Appeal 2017)“…rges for nonconsensual disclosure of a private image under La.R.S. 14:283.2. The narrative portion of the po…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 14:337Unlawful use of an unmanned aircraft systemIn forcecited in 7 of our articles
A.(1) Unlawful use of an unmanned aircraft system is any of the following: (a) The intentional use of an unmanned aircraft system to conduct surveillance of, gather evidence or collect information about, or photographically or electronically record a targeted facility without the prior written consent of the owner of the targeted facility. (b) The intentional use of an unmanned aircraft system over the grounds of the governor's mansion, state or local jail, prison, or other correctional facility that incarcerates or detains juveniles or adults accused of, convicted of, sentenced for, or adjudicated delinquent for violations of criminal law without the express written consent of the person in charge of that state building, state or local jail, prison, or other correctional facility.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legis.la.gov
§ 14:73.13Unlawful deepfakesIn forcecited in 10 of our articles
A. Any person who, with knowledge that the material is a deepfake depicting a minor, knowingly creates or possesses material that depicts a minor engaging in sexual conduct shall be punished by imprisonment at hard labor for not less than five nor more than twenty years, or a fine of not more than ten thousand dollars, or both. At least five years of the sentence of imprisonment imposed shall be served without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence. B.(1) Except as provided in Paragraph (2) of this Subsection, any person who, with knowledge that the material is a deepfake that depicts another person, without consent of the person depicted, engaging in sexual conduct, knowingly advertises, distributes, exhibits, exchanges with, promotes, or sells any sexual material shall be punished by imprisonment at hard labor for not less than ten nor more than thirty years, a fine of not more than fifty thousand dollars, or both.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-03 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legis.la.gov
§ 14:73.14Unlawful dissemination or sale of images of another created by artificial intelligenceIn forcecited in 10 of our articles
A. It shall be unlawful for any person, with the intent to coerce, harass, intimidate, or maliciously disseminate or sell any video or still image created by artificial intelligence that depicts another person who is totally nude or in a state of undress so as to expose the genitals, pubic area, buttocks, or female breast, when the person disseminating the video or still image knows or has reason to know that the person is not licensed or authorized to disseminate or sell such video or still image. B. The provisions of this Section shall not apply to an interactive computer service, electronic mail service provider, or a provider of a telecommunications service or any information service as defined in 47 U.S.C. 153, system, or access software provider that provides or enables computer access by multiple users to a computer server that was used by a person to commit any act prohibited by Subsection A of this Section. C.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legis.la.gov
§ 15:1303Interception and disclosure of wire, electronic, or oral communicationsIn forcecited in 36 of our articles
A. Except as otherwise specifically provided in this Chapter, it shall be unlawful for any person to: (1) Willfully intercept, endeavor to intercept, or procure any other person to intercept or endeavor to intercept, any wire, electronic or oral communication; (2) Willfully use, endeavor to use, or procure any other person to use or endeavor to use, any electronic, mechanical, or other device to intercept any oral communication when: (a) Such device is affixed to, or otherwise transmits a signal through, a wire, cable, or other like connection used in wire or electronic communication; or (b) Such device transmits communications by radio or interferes with the transmission of such communication; (3) Willfully disclose, or endeavor to disclose, to any other person the contents of any wire, electronic, or oral communication, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through the interception of a wire, electronic, or oral communication in violation of this Subsection; or (4) Willfully use, or endeavor to use, the contents of any wire, electronic, or oral communication, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through the…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legis.la.gov
Cited in 25 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2020
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Louisiana courts apply the consent exception in La. R.S. 15:1303. Smith v. Smith (2005) held a parent may consent for a child where he has a good faith, reasonable basis that it serves the child’s best interest, placing the recording within 15:1303(C)(4). Keller v. Aymond (1998) held willfulness is not required for civil liability.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Smith v. Smith (Louisiana Court of Appeal 2005, 923 So. 2d 732)✓A father secretly taped his daughter's calls with her mother in his own home during a custody fight; the court applied vicarious consent and held his good faith, objectively reasonable belief that taping served the child's best interest fell within La. R.S. 15:1303(C)(4).
- Johnson v. Aymond (Louisiana Court of Appeal 1998, 709 So. 2d 1072)✓A newspaper printed excerpts of a phone conversation a defendant had allegedly taped and handed out at a press conference; the court held those allegations, accepted as true, state a cause of action under the literal language of La. R.S. 15:1303(A)(4), and reversed the dismissal.
- Keller v. Aymond (Louisiana Court of Appeal 1998, 722 So. 2d 1224)✓A newspaper published excerpts of private calls taped by another and handed out at a press conference; the court held criminal willfulness under section 1303 is not needed for civil damages, and that fact issues over the paper's reason to know barred summary judgment under 1303.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 44:3Records of prosecutive, investigative, and law enforcement agencies and communications districtsIn forcecited in 10 of our articles
A. Nothing in this Chapter shall be construed to require disclosures of records, or the information contained therein, held by the offices of the attorney general, district attorneys, sheriffs, police departments, Department of Public Safety and Corrections, Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, marshals, investigators, public health investigators, correctional agencies, communications districts, intelligence agencies, Council on Peace Officer Standards and Training, Louisiana Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Criminal Justice, or publicly owned water districts of the state, which records are: (1) Records pertaining to pending criminal litigation or any criminal litigation which can be reasonably anticipated, until such litigation has been finally adjudicated or otherwise settled, except as otherwise provided in Subsection F of this Section; or (2) Records containing the identity of a confidential source of information or records which would tend to reveal the identity of a confidential source of information; or (3) Records containing security procedures, investigative training information or aids, investigative techniques, investigative technical equipment or…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-07 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legis.la.gov
Cited in 104 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):In Re Matter Under Investigation (2009) held La. R.S. 44:3(A)(1)'s criminal-litigation exception is temporary and that whether litigation is reasonably anticipated must be decided case by case at a contradictory hearing on objective factors; Cormier (1989) held initial officer reports under 44:3(A)(4)(a) are public records.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- In Re Matter Under Investigation (Supreme Court of Louisiana 2009, 15 So. 3d 972)✓News organizations sought the Attorney General's file on deaths at a New Orleans hospital after Hurricane Katrina; the court held section 44:3(A)(1) exempts records pertaining to reasonably anticipated criminal litigation and remanded for a hearing on objective factors.
- Cormier v. PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST OF GIULIO (Supreme Court of Louisiana 1989, 553 So. 2d 806)✓A requester sought a sheriff's initial police reports in several cases; the court held section 44:3(A)(4)(a) makes the investigating officer's initial report a public record, ordered the reports produced, and required an evidentiary hearing on the withheld misconduct letters.
- Innocence Project New Orleans v. New Orleans Police Department (Louisiana Court of Appeal 2013, 2013 La.App. 4 Cir. 0921)✓A nonprofit sought NOPD files on an arrest whose conviction became final in 1993; the court treated the section 44:3(A)(4)(a) exemption as temporal, ending once no further litigation is forthcoming, and upheld fees and a penalty against the custodian who ignored the request.
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
The laws cited above reference these related sections in their own text:
- Louisiana Revised Statutes § 14:61 — Unauthorized entry of a critical infrastructure view in our statute record · read at the official source
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
- La. R.S. 14:283 - Video Voyeurism(legis.la.gov).gov
- La. R.S. 14:283.2 - Nonconsensual Disclosure(legis.la.gov).gov
- La. R.S. 15:1303 - Interception of Communications(legis.la.gov).gov
- La. R.S. 14:337 - Unlawful Use of Unmanned Aircraft(legis.la.gov).gov
- La. R.S. 44:3 - Public Records, Law Enforcement Body-Worn Camera Recordings(legis.la.gov).gov
- 18 U.S.C. 2511 - Federal Wiretap Act(law.cornell.edu)
- FAA UAS Regulations(faa.gov).gov
- La. R.S. 14:73.13 - Deepfake Sexual Content (2023 Act 457)(legis.la.gov).gov
- TAKE IT DOWN Act (signed May 19, 2026)(congress.gov).gov
- Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press - Louisiana Recording Guide(rcfp.org)