South Carolina

South Carolina Recording Laws (2026): One-Party Consent Rules

By Recording Law Editorial TeamPublished June 5, 202612 min read

South Carolina is a one-party consent state under S.C. Code Ann. § 17-30-30(C): if you are a party to the conversation, you may record it without notifying anyone else. Recording without consent is a felony punishable by up to five years in prison, and the victim can sue for at least $25,000 in statutory damages, one of the highest civil floors in the country.

South Carolina recording law at a glance

Question	Answer
Consent rule	One-party consent
Primary statute	S.C. Code Ann. § 17-30-30(C)
When recording is illegal	When no party consents (third-party interception)
Criminal penalty	Felony: up to 5 years / $5,000 (§ 17-30-50(A))
Civil damages floor	Greater of $500/day, $25,000, or actual damages (§ 17-30-135)
Hidden cameras / voyeurism	§ 16-17-470 (sexual-gratification intent required for (B); forfeiture mandatory)
Recording police	Protected by First Amendment per Sharpe, 59 F.4th 674 (4th Cir. 2023)

For the full breakdown of each rule, see the in-depth guides below.

Recording in-person conversations in South Carolina

South Carolina's one-party consent rule comes from S.C. Code § 17-30-30(C), which reads: "It is lawful under this chapter for a person not acting under color of law to intercept a wire, oral, or electronic communication where the person is a party to the communication or where one of the parties to the communication has given prior consent to the interception."

Either branch is independently sufficient. You can record your own conversation without asking anyone; you can also record a conversation after one participant (including yourself) gives consent. There is no beep-tone requirement and no advance-notice obligation for civilian recordings.

The statute covers wire, oral, and electronic communications as defined in § 17-30-15. Oral communication is an utterance made under circumstances justifying a reasonable expectation of privacy. A loud argument on a public sidewalk receives little protection; a quiet conversation in a closed office or medical exam room is covered. A third party who is not a participant and has no consent from any party commits a felony by intercepting the communication.

South Carolina over-the-shoulder view of two people seated across a small table mid-conversation

One South Carolina-specific doctrine to know: in State v. Whitner, 399 S.C. 547, 732 S.E.2d 861 (2012), the South Carolina Supreme Court recognized that a parent or guardian may give vicarious consent on behalf of a minor child, but only with a "good faith, objectively reasonable basis" that the recording is in the child's best interest. Tactical use in a custody dispute does not qualify.

South Carolina's safe harbor notably lacks the federal "criminal or tortious purpose" qualifier found in 18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(d). On its face, a one-party recording made with a tortious motive may still clear the criminal statute, though common-law tort remedies (intrusion upon seclusion, public disclosure of private facts) can still apply.

Recording phone calls in South Carolina

Phone calls are wire communications under § 17-30-15 and follow the same one-party rule. If you are on the call, you may record it. The rule applies equally to landlines, cell phones, VoIP services (Zoom, Teams, Google Meet, WhatsApp, FaceTime audio), and conference calls in which you are a participant.

Voicemails left for you are also covered: you, as the called party, are a party to the message, so saving and forwarding an incoming voicemail falls within the one-party safe harbor.

For interstate calls, federal ECPA at 18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(d) sets a one-party floor, but the all-party-consent states (California, Florida, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maryland, Montana, New Hampshire, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Washington) may assert jurisdiction when one party is in their state. The practical rule: if you may use the recording in litigation, obtain on-the-record consent so no state's law is at issue.

For a deeper treatment, see South Carolina Phone Call Recording Laws.

South Carolina dome security camera in the corner of an office ceiling

Hidden cameras, doorbells, and nanny cams

Title 17, Chapter 30 covers audio interception. Surreptitious visual capture is handled separately by S.C. Code § 16-17-470.

Subsection (A) (peeping): It is unlawful to be a peeping tom on or about the premises of another, including any person who employs video or audio equipment for that purpose. Penalty: misdemeanor, up to 3 years and $500.

Subsection (B) (voyeurism): A person commits voyeurism by knowingly photographing, audio recording, video recording, producing, or creating a digital file of another person for the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire, without that person's consent, in a place where the person has a reasonable expectation of privacy (bathrooms, dressing rooms, locker rooms, bedrooms, hotel rooms). The sexual-gratification purpose is a required element. First offense: misdemeanor, up to 3 years and $500. Second or subsequent offense: felony, up to 5 years and $500 to $5,000.

Subsection (C) (aggravated voyeurism): Knowingly selling, distributing, or disseminating any image or recording taken in violation of the section. Penalty: felony, up to 10 years and $500 to $5,000.

Forfeiture: Materials procured in violation must be forfeited and destroyed when no longer required for evidentiary purposes (§ 16-17-470(F)).

For your home, a doorbell or nanny camera pointed at your own property (yard, entryway, driveway) is lawful. Pointing it into a neighbor's bedroom or bathroom implicates § 16-17-470 even on your own property. An audio-capable camera that records conversations inside the home falls under § 17-30-30; the one-party rule applies to any audio captured while you are present in the conversation.

For deeper guidance, see South Carolina Security Camera Laws and South Carolina Voyeurism Laws.

South Carolina wooden gavel on a sound block on a judge's bench

Penalties for illegal recording in South Carolina

Criminal

Under § 17-30-50(A), intentionally intercepting, disclosing, or using a wire, oral, or electronic communication in violation of the chapter is a felony: up to 5 years in prison or a $5,000 fine, or both. A narrow misdemeanor reduction (up to 1 year and $1,000) applies only to first-offense, non-commercial interceptions of unscrambled radio-band communications. Ordinary phone or in-person interceptions carry only the felony.

Civil

S.C. Code § 17-30-135 entitles the victim to recover the greater of actual damages, $500 per day of violation, or $25,000, whichever is highest. The floor is not a cap: a six-month violation produces $90,000 in per-day damages, and the plaintiff recovers that higher figure. On top of the floor, the statute provides:

Element	What the statute gives
Liquidated damages floor	Greater of $500/day, $25,000, or actual damages
Punitive damages	Available
Attorney fees	Mandatory (not discretionary)
Litigation costs	Recoverable
Equitable relief	Available (injunction, destruction of recordings)
Statute of limitations	5 years from discovery (discovery rule, not date of recording)
Jury trial	Statutory right

For comparison, federal ECPA at 18 U.S.C. § 2520 caps statutory damages at the greater of $100 per day or $10,000, with discretionary (not mandatory) attorney fees. South Carolina's $25,000 floor is two and a half times higher; its per-day rate is five times higher; fees are mandatory; and the SoL is a 5-year discovery rule rather than two years. South Carolina's civil package is one of the strongest wiretap remedies in any U.S. jurisdiction.

Recording the police in South Carolina

South Carolina sits in the Fourth Circuit. The controlling precedent is Sharpe v. Winterville Police Dep't, 59 F.4th 674 (4th Cir. 2023), which held that recording and livestreaming on-duty police in public is presumptively protected First Amendment activity, subject only to reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions. The U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari on June 24, 2024 (Justice Kagan took no part), leaving the Fourth Circuit's published holding in force throughout South Carolina.

A note on qualified immunity: the Sharpe panel held that the individual officer who acted in 2018 had qualified immunity because livestreaming specifically was not yet clearly established at that time. After Sharpe, the right is clearly established going forward. A municipality that maintains an anti-recording policy faces Section 1983 liability under Sharpe even when individual officers may assert immunity for spontaneous conduct.

Practical limits: record from a reasonable distance, do not physically obstruct the officer, and comply with lawful orders to step back. Under § 17-30-30(C), any participant in the encounter (including the person being stopped) may record audio without notifying the officer.

For more, see South Carolina Laws on Recording Police.

South Carolina surveillance camera lens in sharp focus with a blurred urban streetscape behind

Special topics in South Carolina

Intimate images and AI deepfakes (Act 37 of 2025)

Act No. 37 of 2025 (H. 3058), signed by Governor Henry McMaster on May 12, 2025, and effective immediately, created S.C. Code §§ 16-15-330 and 16-15-332. Section 16-15-332 criminalizes intentional dissemination of an intimate image or a digitally forged intimate image (AI-generated content that "appears to a reasonable person to be indistinguishable from an authentic visual depiction") of an identifiable person without effective consent. Aggravated first offense (intent to harm or profit): felony, up to 5 years and $5,000. Subsequent aggravated offense: mandatory felony of 1 to 10 years and $10,000 (no suspension or probation). Non-aggravated first offense: misdemeanor, up to 1 year and $5,000. South Carolina was the last state without such a statute before Act 37 closed the gap.

TAKE IT DOWN Act federal overlay

The TAKE IT DOWN Act, Pub. L. 119-12 (signed May 19, 2025), criminalizes knowing publication of non-consensual intimate imagery including AI-generated forgeries and requires covered platforms to remove flagged content within 48 hours (platform obligation effective May 19, 2026). The federal Act layers on top of § 16-15-332 without preempting state law.

Body-worn cameras: the Walter L. Scott Body Camera Law

S.C. Code § 23-1-240, named for Walter Scott (fatally shot during a 2015 North Charleston traffic stop), requires state and local agencies to implement body-worn cameras under Law Enforcement Training Council guidelines. Body-camera data is explicitly excluded from the Freedom of Information Act; access is limited to a closed statutory list (criminal defendants, civil litigants, the subject of the recording, owners of affected property, and their attorneys), proceeding through the Rules of Criminal or Civil Procedure or a court order. A general FOIA request will be denied.

Workplace recording and the NLRB

Under § 17-30-30(C), an employee who is a party to a workplace conversation may record it without telling management. However, South Carolina employers can adopt narrowly tailored no-recording policies; violating a company rule is not a state crime but can be a basis for at-will termination. Federal NLRA coverage still applies to most South Carolina major employers. Under Stericycle, Inc., 372 NLRB No. 113 (Aug. 2, 2023), a blanket no-recording rule is presumptively unlawful. NLRB GC 25-05 (Feb. 14, 2025) is a housekeeping rescission of prior GC guidance, not an overruling of Stericycle. GC 25-07 (June 25, 2025) narrowly bars surreptitious recording of collective-bargaining sessions as a per se bad-faith-bargaining violation. For detail, see South Carolina Workplace Recording Laws.

Federal overlay: ECPA, FCC, and HIPAA

ECPA, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510-2522, is the federal one-party-consent floor; South Carolina's § 17-30-30(C) generally meets or exceeds it. The FCC's old "beep tone" rule at 47 C.F.R. § 64.501 was removed effective November 20, 2017 and is no longer live law. FCC Declaratory Ruling 24-17 (Feb. 8, 2024) classifies AI-generated voices as "artificial or prerecorded voice" under the TCPA, requiring prior express written consent for marketing robocalls. HIPAA's Privacy Rule, 45 C.F.R. Part 164, binds South Carolina providers, not patients; a patient may record their own medical visit under the one-party rule.

Recent legal developments

May 12, 2025: Governor McMaster signs Act 37 of 2025 (H. 3058), creating §§ 16-15-330 and 16-15-332. South Carolina becomes the last state to enact a non-consensual intimate-image statute; the law expressly covers AI deepfakes.
May 19, 2025: TAKE IT DOWN Act signed federally; criminal prohibition immediate; platform 48-hour takedown obligation effective May 19, 2026.
February 14, 2025: NLRB GC 25-05 issued, rescinding certain Biden-era GC memoranda and returning to Boeing-era enforcement priorities. Does not overrule Stericycle.
January 24, 2025: Eleventh Circuit vacates FCC One-to-One Consent Rule (FCC 24-24); mandate April 30, 2025. Pre-existing TCPA consent rules under 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200(a)(2)-(3) remain in force.
June 24, 2024: U.S. Supreme Court denies certiorari in Winterville Police Dep't v. Sharpe, No. 23-272 (Justice Kagan took no part). Fourth Circuit's Sharpe holding remains controlling in South Carolina.
June 25, 2025: NLRB GC 25-07 issued, taking position that surreptitious recording of collective-bargaining sessions is a per se bad-faith-bargaining violation.

South Carolina recording laws in depth

Want to know more? Each page below covers a specific recording context in depth.

By type of recording

By place or relationship

More South Carolina laws

This article is general legal information, not legal advice. Recording laws change and apply differently to each situation. For advice about your situation, consult a licensed South Carolina attorney.

More South Carolina Laws

Sources and References

Primary civilian one-party consent statute(scstatehouse.gov).gov
Visual capture and physical peeping statute; sexual-gratification element required for (B)(scstatehouse.gov).gov
NCII and AI deepfake statute(scstatehouse.gov).gov
Act 37 of 2025 bill page(scstatehouse.gov).gov
Act 37 of 2025 signing(governor.sc.gov).gov
Body-worn camera statute; FOIA exclusion(scstatehouse.gov).gov
Vicarious parental consent doctrine under § 17-30-30(sccourts.org)
Controlling 4th Circuit record-the-police precedent (cert denied June 24, 2024)(ca4.uscourts.gov).gov
Federal ECPA interception prohibition(uscode.house.gov).gov
Federal civil remedy ($100/day or $10,000 floor)(uscode.house.gov).gov
Federal NCII and deepfake criminal and platform-takedown statute(congress.gov).gov
Controlling NLRB workplace no-recording-rule standard(nlrb.gov).gov
Housekeeping rescission of prior GC guidance(nlrb.gov).gov
Per se bar on surreptitious bargaining-session recording(nlrb.gov).gov
AI-voice TCPA overlay(docs.fcc.gov).gov
Vacatur of FCC One-to-One Consent Rule(media.ca11.uscourts.gov).gov
Federal health-information privacy framework(ecfr.gov).gov
Federal investigator default for District of South Carolina(justice.gov).gov