EnglishEspañol
South Dakota flag

South Dakota

South Dakota Phone Call Recording Laws

Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 15, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of August 15, 2026. · 6 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

South Dakota Phone Call Recording Laws

Frequently Asked Questions

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

Yes. South Dakota is a one-party consent state under SDCL 23A-35A-20. You can record any phone call you participate in without notifying or getting permission from the other person. This applies to cell phones, landlines, VoIP calls, and video calls.

Can I record a phone call with someone in California from South Dakota?

You should get the other person's consent first. California is a two-party consent state, and the stricter law typically applies to interstate calls. Recording someone in California without their knowledge could violate California Penal Code 632, even though the recording is legal under South Dakota law.

Can my employer record my work phone calls in South Dakota?

Yes, as long as at least one party to the call (typically the employee handling the call) consents. Employers commonly record customer service, sales, and compliance calls. If the employer records calls without any participant's consent, it could violate SDCL 23A-35A-20.

Is it illegal to tap someone's phone in South Dakota?

Yes. Intercepting phone calls you are not part of, without any participant's consent, is a Class 5 felony under SDCL 23A-35A-20. This includes wiretapping, using surveillance software, and any other method of intercepting someone else's calls without authorization.

Can I use a recorded phone call as evidence in South Dakota court?

Yes. Phone recordings made lawfully under one-party consent are generally admissible as evidence in South Dakota courts. The recording must be authenticated, relevant, and its probative value must outweigh any prejudicial effect. Illegally recorded calls are typically inadmissible.

Updates

Removed two fabricated criminal offenses (disclosing and using an intercepted call) that SDCL 23A-35A-20 does not actually create, and corrected the interstate-consent table to show that Connecticut's all-party phone-recording rule is a civil cause of action, not a criminal one-party/all-party rule like the other listed states.

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

Governing law re-checked for recent changes

Governing law re-checked for recent changes

Reviewed and approved by an editor

Sources and References

  1. SDCL 23A-35A-20 -- Overhearing or Recording Communications by Means of Eavesdropping Device(sdlegislature.gov).gov
  2. SDCL Chapter 23A-35A -- Interception of Wire, Electronic, or Oral Communications(sdlegislature.gov).gov
  3. FCC Guide on Recording Telephone Conversations(fcc.gov).gov
  4. 18 U.S.C. 2511 -- Federal Wiretap Act(uscode.house.gov).gov
  5. 18 U.S.C. 2520 -- Civil Damages for Federal Wiretap Violations(uscode.house.gov).gov
  6. FCC Telemarketing and Robocall Regulations(fcc.gov).gov
Share: