Vermont

It depends

Vermont does not resolve to a single rule — the answer depends on the medium or on who is recording. Read the nuance and the statute before acting.

Vermont is commonly listed as one-party consent. That is the label you will find on most reference lists, and it is close enough to be useful and wrong enough to matter. What the statute actually does is above.

The part that catches people out

Our reading, not verified text. Everything in this section is editorial judgment about how the statute works. Unlike the statute above, the reading itself has not been checked against a source. The decisions named below have been checked against a court record and exist as cited — but what we say they hold is still our reading, not the court's words.

Vermont has no wiretapping or recording-consent statute at all. Title 13's chapter index contains no chapter on eavesdropping, wiretapping or interception, and the Vermont Electronic Communication Privacy Act governs compelled production from service providers, not consent to record. The rule comes from the state constitution (ch. I, art. 11) as read in State v. Geraw and State v. Brooks — which restrain the state, not private parties. Treat Vermont as unsettled for private recording rather than as permissive.

Where this comes from

Federal floor

Federal law permits recording with one party's consent unless the recording is made to commit a crime or tort. Federal law is the FLOOR; a state may and many do require more. Where an interstate call touches two states with different rules, the safe assumption is the stricter one. See 18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(d).

Reference information, not legal advice. Statutes change and courts read them differently; confirm the current text with the linked primary source and counsel licensed in the jurisdiction before relying on it.

All jurisdictions · This page as JSON · How this is verified · Terms of reuse

Found an error, or a statute that has moved? Tell us — a citation with the correction gets it into the next revision.