EnglishEspañol
Maine flag

Maine

Maine Laws on Recording in Public: Your Complete Guide (2026)

Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited November 1, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of November 1, 2026. · 6 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

Maine Laws on Recording in Public: Your Complete Guide (2026)

Updates

Corrected the description of Maine's violation-of-privacy law (17-A M.R.S. 511), which bans recording devices in private places without consent and has no sexual-purpose element, narrowed the Glik v. Cunniffe holding to recording officials, added the prior-warning element of Maine's harassment law, and noted the 2025 ban on drones over prisons and jails. We clarified that a police officer may order recording in a park stopped if it interferes with the officer's duties, that public bodies may set reasonable rules for recording open meetings, and that using a zoom lens to capture what is not ordinarily visible inside a private place is a crime under section 511(1)(C). We clarified that the interference test in Gericke v. Begin applies to orders to stop filming, and that officers may still give reasonable safety orders, such as to move back, that limit filming. We also added the intent and lack-of-consent elements to the section 511(1)(C) zoom-lens summary.

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

Corrected our description of Maine's interception law: it bars using a device to capture others' private conversations without a participant's authority, but its definition of intercept excludes a person within normal unaided hearing range.

Corrected the description of Project Veritas Action Fund v. Rollins to the holding the First Circuit actually reached (secret audio recording of police officers in public) and removed an unsupported nationwide comparison.

Corrected a fabricated drone-surveillance statute citation: Maine's real drone law (25 M.R.S. section 4501) regulates law-enforcement drone use with a warrant requirement, not private civilian drone surveillance, which instead falls under the general voyeurism and privacy-tort framework. Also added a working citation link for the Rollins case.

Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources

Governing law re-checked for recent changes

Corrected two stale/wrong statute citations: the right to record open public meetings now cites the current 1 M.R.S.A. section 404 (repealed COVID-era section 403-A no longer applies), and Maine's one-party consent rule for audio recording now cites 15 M.R.S.A. sections 709-710 (the definition of "intercept" excludes a sender/receiver, and section 710 is the offense provision built on that definition) rather than section 712, which lists only narrow institutional exceptions unrelated to ordinary participants.

Governing law re-checked for recent changes

Added Project Veritas Action Fund v. Rollins, 982 F.3d 813 (1st Cir. 2020): the First Circuit held that the First Amendment protects secret audio recording of police officers discharging their official duties in public spaces.

Reviewed and approved by an editor

Sources and References

  1. 15 M.R.S.A. section 710 - Interception of Communications (Maine Legislature)(legislature.maine.gov).gov
  2. 1 M.R.S.A. § 404 - Freedom of Access Act, Public Proceedings(legislature.maine.gov).gov
  3. 17-A M.R.S.A. section 511 - Violation of privacy (Maine Legislature)(legislature.maine.gov).gov
  4. Maine Bureau of Parks and Lands(maine.gov).gov
  5. FAA Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS)(faa.gov).gov
  6. 25 M.R.S. section 4501 - Regulation of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (Law Enforcement) (Maine Legislature)(legislature.maine.gov).gov
Share: