EnglishEspañol
Mississippi flag

Mississippi

Mississippi Video Recording Laws: Surveillance, Filming, and Consent Rules (2026)

Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited November 1, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of August 15, 2026. · 4 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

Mississippi Video Recording Laws: Surveillance, Filming, and Consent Rules (2026)

Updates

Corrected an FAQ answer to state the actual Rule 403 test for excluding a video.

Corrected the hidden-camera penalty tier to cover victims 16 or older rather than 'adult' victims, and added the lewd-intent element to the upskirting takeaway.

We corrected the claim that owning a home or car makes you a party to other people's conversations for audio recording, narrowed the First Amendment description to Turner v. Driver's police holding, added Mississippi's camera and drone peeping felony (section 97-29-61), restored the undress-place element of section 97-29-63, replaced an unsupported repeat-offender claim with the registration requirement, fixed the trespass statute and the reach of the federal video voyeurism law, and corrected a mismatched citation and an inaccurate changelog line. We corrected the FAQ on filming consent to say that secretly filming under someone's clothing with a lewd intent is a felony anywhere, including in public, and aligned the intro, a key takeaway and two other passages with section 97-29-63's requirement of a place where people would undress; we also corrected the drone line to say that most drones must be registered with the FAA.

Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources

Corrected the description of Turner v. Driver to the holding the Fifth Circuit actually reached (a First Amendment right to record the police, subject to reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions) and fixed its docket number.

Corrected the hidden-camera fine cap ($5,000 for both victim-age tiers under Miss. Code 97-29-63) and repointed a dead Turner v. Driver citation.

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

Restored Miss. Code Ann. 97-29-63's specific-intent element (lewd, licentious, or indecent intent) throughout the page; the article had described it as a strict-liability ban on recording in private places.

Governing law re-checked for recent changes

Governing law re-checked for recent changes

Spoke propagation from parent hub: removed FindLaw Turner v. Driver citations (5th Cir. No. 16-10312) from the police, public-recording, and video spokes; corrected is_gov flags for legislature.ms.gov entries in SourcesList components; added keywords and citations arrays to [dashcam](/dashboard-camera-legality-and-privacy-laws-is-it-illegal-to-use-dashcams-in-north-america), landlord-tenant, and schools spokes; updated workplace spoke NLRB section to cite Stericycle, Inc., 372 NLRB No. 113 (2023) as the controlling work-rule standard replacing Boeing. No fabricated cases (Lewis v. State, Glazner v. Glazner) or SB 2437 references found. No 47 CFR 64.501 or FCC 23-107 references found.

Reviewed and approved by an editor

Sources and References

  1. Miss. Code Ann. section 97-29-63 - Hidden Camera Statute(law.justia.com)
  2. Miss. Code Ann. section 41-29-531 - One-Party Consent(law.justia.com)
  3. Turner v. Driver, 848 F.3d 678 (5th Cir. 2017)(courtlistener.com)
  4. 18 U.S.C. section 1801 - Video Voyeurism Prevention Act(law.cornell.edu)
  5. Mississippi Rules of Evidence(courts.ms.gov).gov
  6. Mississippi Legislature Official Site(legislature.ms.gov).gov
  7. FAA - Unmanned Aircraft Systems(faa.gov).gov
  8. FTC - COPPA Rule(ftc.gov).gov
Share: