EnglishEspañol
New Jersey flag

New Jersey

New Jersey Laws on Recording Police: Your Rights and Limits

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. · 7 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

New Jersey Laws on Recording Police: Your Rights and Limits

Updates

Restored the Fuster v. Township of Chatham privacy caveat (access is not automatic), removed an inaccurate statement that the requester had an independent right to the footage, dropped an unverified reporter citation, and aligned the advice on deletion orders.

We corrected what Riley v. California says (police generally need a warrant to search your phone but may hold it while they get one), replaced an inaccurate body camera retention schedule with the statute's rules, described the Fuster ruling accurately, and credited the right to record public meetings to Tarus v. Borough of Pine Hill rather than the Open Public Meetings Act.

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

Corrected the session law cited for New Jersey's police body camera requirement (P.L. 2020, c. 128) and removed an unverified reference to an Attorney General directive.

Corrected the description of Fields v. City of Philadelphia: the court granted the officers qualified immunity for their 2012 and 2013 conduct and did not rule on how immunity applies to later conduct.

Fixed three dead citation links (Fields v. City of Philadelphia, Riley v. California, and the Attorney General's body-worn camera policy), corrected the body-worn-camera equipping statute citation from N.J.S.A. 40A:14-118.5 to the correct 40A:14-118.3, and narrowed our description of Fuster v. Township of Chatham (2025): the case holds that OPRA does not exempt a crime victim's own recorded statement from disclosure just because an uncharged third party appears in it, not a general rule that officials cannot refuse any body-camera request.

Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources

Governing law re-checked for recent changes

Governing law re-checked for recent changes

Reviewed and approved by an editor

Sources and References

  1. Fields v. City of Philadelphia, 862 F.3d 353 (3d Cir. 2017)(courtlistener.com)
  2. N.J. Stat. Ann. 2A:156A-4 - Lawful Interception Activities(law.justia.com)
  3. Riley v. California, 573 U.S. 373 (2014)(supremecourt.gov).gov
  4. New Jersey Attorney General Directive 2021-5 - Body Worn Camera Policy(nj.gov).gov
  5. New Jersey Government Records Council - OPRA(nj.gov).gov
  6. New Jersey Open Public Meetings Act(nj.gov).gov
  7. 42 U.S.C. 1983 - Civil Rights Remedies(law.cornell.edu)
  8. N.J. Stat. Ann. 2C:29-1 - Obstructing Administration of Law(law.justia.com)
  9. New Jersey Office of the Attorney General(nj.gov).gov
  10. New Jersey P.L. 2020, c. 128 (N.J.S.A. 40A:14-118.3), body worn camera requirement(pub.njleg.state.nj.us).gov
  11. New Jersey P.L. 2020, c. 129 (N.J.S.A. 40A:14-118.5), body worn camera use and recordings(pub.njleg.state.nj.us).gov
Share: