Can I Legally Record the Police?

Answer:

Yes — recording police officers in public is a constitutionally protected activity in Georgia. No Georgia law prohibits recording law enforcement performing their duties in a public place, and federal courts including the Eleventh Circuit have recognized this First Amendment right. Georgia is also a one-party consent state for audio recording under O.C.G.A. § 16-11-62. However, the legal right to record does not eliminate all practical risk — officers who object to being recorded sometimes respond with obstruction charges under O.C.G.A. § 16-10-24. Maintaining a safe, non-intrusive distance and recording without interfering is the most effective way to protect both your right and your freedom.

Recording police officers in public is a constitutionally protected activity. There is no Georgia law that prohibits a person from recording law enforcement officers who are performing their duties in a public place. Courts, including federal appellate courts, have consistently recognized that the First Amendment protects the right to record police officers in the public performance of their duties. However, the legal right to record does not mean doing so is without practical risk, and understanding both the right and its limits is important.

The Constitutional Basis for Recording Police

The First Amendment right to gather information about government activity — including the conduct of law enforcement officers in the field — is well-established in federal constitutional law. Recording police in public serves the broader democratic interest in government accountability. The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, whose decisions govern federal constitutional interpretation in Georgia, has recognized that this right exists, as have other circuit courts across the country.

Georgia is a one-party consent state for purposes of audio recording under O.C.G.A. § 16-11-62. This means that a person may record a conversation to which they are a party without the consent of other participants. When recording an interaction with a police officer in which you are present and participating, this provision generally supports the legality of the recording.

The Obstruction Risk: Where the Legal Right Meets Reality

While the legal right to record police in public is clear, the practical reality is that officers who object to being recorded sometimes respond by arresting the person recording on charges of obstruction of a law enforcement officer under O.C.G.A. § 16-10-24. Georgia’s obstruction statute prohibits knowingly and willfully obstructing, hindering, or impeding a law enforcement officer in the lawful discharge of their official duties.

The critical legal question in these situations is whether recording an officer — without physically interfering with their actions — constitutes obstruction. The weight of legal authority, including federal court decisions, holds that passively recording an officer from a lawful vantage point does not constitute obstruction. Simply holding a phone and recording does not obstruct police work. However, if the person recording physically positions themselves in a way that interferes with the officer’s ability to conduct an investigation, detain a suspect, or otherwise perform their duties, the analysis changes.

Practical Guidance

If you choose to record police activity, maintaining a safe and non-intrusive distance is the most effective way to protect both your right to record and your own freedom. Do not position yourself in a manner that the officer could reasonably characterize as interfering with an active investigation or detention. Do not argue with the officer about your right to record while they are actively engaged in police work. Record calmly and silently from a position where your presence does not affect what the officer is doing.

If you are arrested for recording police in circumstances where you believe you did nothing to obstruct their duties, that is precisely the kind of case where experienced legal representation can make a significant difference. An unlawful obstruction arrest based solely on the act of recording in a public place implicates both your First Amendment rights and your Fourth Amendment protection against unlawful seizure, and both claims can be pursued through competent legal counsel.

5 Star Rating

Brett and his team were beyond supportive, helpful, gracious, caring and knowledgeable! We went through the most challenging and difficult time in our life and he was there every step of the way. With results we could never have imagined but definitely prayed for.

Not to mention his level of professionalism. From the first time we spoke to the first time we saw him in court. He stood out from almost every other attorney there. We were so appreciative that our attorney looked and was so professional, pulled together and prepared. When so many others were none of these things.

Thank you just doesn’t seem like enough to convey our feelings and appreciation.

Karen L.

5 Star Rating

I tried to write this several times and it brought me to tears. First may I say this has been the hardest three years of my life. Five lawyers I interviewed and none even understood the law as it applied to my case. So I thought I would try one more and it was Brett. From our first conversation together I knew he understood the law and was the perfect one for the case. I want to say how he prepared the case and presented it, achieving a full dismissal and ruling the police violated my first amendment rights. Complete genius!!!!

If you're reading this review and unsure, stop...call Brett. He always returned my call or texts within a couple hours, never more than 24 hours. He was always courteous and knowledgeable, trust me he talked me off the ledge a couple times. I would have given him 10 stars but 5 was the only option. Thank you Brett for all you did for me!!!!!