Vermont
Vermont Dashcam Laws
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. · 2 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content
Vermont has no statute prohibiting dashcams. Mount it on the dashboard, or keep a windshield mount within one of the small corner spaces Vermont's windshield statute allows. Audio recording is governed by federal one-party consent under 18 U.S.C. 2511, which lets you record conversations you are part of; it does not cover passengers' conversations you are not part of unless one of them consents.
Dashcams are legal in Vermont. No statute specifically prohibits dashboard cameras. Vermont's windshield obstruction rules require proper mounting, and federal one-party consent governs audio.
This guide covers mounting, audio rules, evidence use, commercial fleet dashcams, and privacy.
Legality and Mounting
Dashcams are legal for personal, commercial, rideshare, and recreational vehicles. Vermont's windshield-obstruction statute, 23 V.S.A. 1125, bars material painted or adhered on the windshield or the front side windows except in a few small spaces, including a 4 by 12 inch area in the lower right-hand corner and a 2 by 2.5 inch area in the upper left-hand corner. The exception behind the rearview mirror covers only the mirror itself and toll transponders, and hanging items are barred only if they materially obstruct the driver's view. A dashboard mount, or a small camera within one of the permitted corner spaces, avoids the statute.
Audio Recording
Federal one-party consent (18 U.S.C. 2511) applies. Under 18 U.S.C. 2511(2)(d), you may record a conversation you are a party to, such as your own conversations in the car or your exchange with an officer during a traffic stop.
That consent does not extend to conversations between passengers that you are not part of. Recording those without the consent of at least one participant falls outside the exception, so tell passengers when your dashcam records audio, or turn audio off.
Evidence Use
Dashcam footage is admissible in Vermont courts for traffic accidents, DUI cases, hit-and-run identification, insurance claims, and criminal cases. Authenticate and keep unaltered.
Commercial Fleet Dashcams
Employers can install dashcams including cabin-facing cameras. Notify drivers through policies. FMCSA does not prohibit dashcams.
Parking Mode
Video-only parking mode is generally permissible in public parking areas.
More Vermont Recording Laws
Audio Recording | Video Recording | Voyeurism & Hidden Cameras | Workplace Recording | Recording Police | Phone Call Recording | Security Cameras | Recording in Public | Landlord-Tenant | Dashcam Laws | Schools | Medical Recording
Back to Vermont Recording Laws
More Vermont Recording Topics
More Vermont Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Are dashcams legal in Vermont?
Yes. No Vermont law prohibits dashcams. Mount it on the dashboard or within one of the small windshield spaces 23 V.S.A. 1125 allows.
Where should I mount my dashcam in Vermont?
On the dashboard is simplest. 23 V.S.A. 1125 bars items adhered to the windshield except in small spaces, such as a 4 by 12 inch area in the lower right-hand corner or a 2 by 2.5 inch area in the upper left-hand corner; the exception for the area behind the rearview mirror covers only the mirror itself and toll transponders.
Can my dashcam record audio in Vermont?
Yes, for conversations you take part in. Federal one-party consent applies to conversations you are a party to. It does not cover passengers' conversations you are not part of, so tell passengers when audio is on.
Can I use dashcam footage as evidence?
Yes. Dashcam footage is regularly admitted in Vermont courts. Keep it authentic and unaltered.
Do Vermont insurers offer dashcam discounts?
Some may. Check with your provider. Dashcam footage speeds up claims processing.
Updates
We corrected a description of the windshield exception near the rearview mirror, which covers only the mirror and toll transponders.
Corrected the mounting advice: Vermont's windshield statute bars items attached to the windshield outside a few small corner spaces, so a mount behind the rearview mirror is not covered by an exception; a dashboard mount avoids the statute.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Clarified that federal one-party consent lets a driver record only conversations the driver takes part in, not passengers' private conversations.
Added a citation to Vermont's windshield-obstruction statute (23 V.S.A. 1125) backing the dashcam-mounting advice, which was previously stated with no source.
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
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Vermont Statutes Annotated, Title 23: Motor Vehicles, Chapter 13: Operation of Vehicles, Subchapter: MISCELLANEOUS RULES
§ 1125Obstructing windshields, windowsIn forcecited in 3 of our articles
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, a person shall not operate a motor vehicle on which material or items have been painted or adhered on or over, or hung in back of, any transparent part of a motor vehicle windshield, vent windows, or side windows located immediately to the left and right of the operator. The prohibition of this section on hanging items shall apply only when a hanging item materially obstructs the driver’s view. (b) Notwithstanding subsection (a) of this section, a person may operate a motor vehicle with material or items painted or adhered on or over, or hung in back of, the windshield, vent windows, or side windows: (1) in a space not over four inches high and 12 inches long in the lower right-hand corner of the windshield; (2) in such space as the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles may specify for location of any sticker required by governmental regulation; (3) in a space not over two inches high and two and one-half inches long in the upper left-hand corner of the windshield; (4) if the operator is a person employed by the federal, State, or local government or a volunteer emergency responder operating an authorized emergency vehicle, who…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-08 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislature.vermont.gov
Cited in 2 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2016
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Hurley (Supreme Court of Vermont 2015, 198 Vt. 552)“…n, J. ¶ 1. This case calls upon us to decide whether 23 V.S.A. § 1125 prohibits the hanging of any item on th…”
- State v. Shamel L. Alexander (Supreme Court of Vermont 2016, 201 Vt. 329)“…of the front windshield and stopped the cab for violating 23 V.S.A. § 1125, which prohibits driving with an obstr…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Vermont Window Tint Laws (2026): Legal VLT Limits, Vermont Windshield Mounting Laws (2026 Guide)
United States Code Title 18
§ 2511Interception and disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications prohibitedIn forcecited in 441 of our articles
Except as otherwise specifically provided in this chapter any person who— intentionally intercepts, endeavors to intercept, or procures any other person to intercept or endeavor to intercept, any wire, oral, or electronic communication; intentionally uses, endeavors to use, or procures any other person to use or endeavor to use any electronic, mechanical, or other device to intercept any oral communication when— such device is affixed to, or otherwise transmits a signal through, a wire, cable, or other like connection used in wire communication; or such device transmits communications by radio, or interferes with the transmission of such communication; or such person knows, or has reason to know, that such device or any component thereof has been sent through the mail or transported in interstate or foreign commerce; or such use or endeavor to use (A) takes place on the premises of any business or other commercial establishment the operations of which affect interstate or foreign commerce; or (B) obtains or is for the purpose of obtaining information relating to the operations of any business or other commercial establishment the operations of which affect interstate or foreign…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-17 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 2,045 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Griggs-Ryan v. Smith (1990) applied the Section 2511(2)(d) prior-consent exception, treating a tenant repeatedly told that all incoming calls were taped as having impliedly consented. United States v. United States District Court (1972) read the then-current Section 2511(3) as conferring no presidential surveillance power.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Mitchell v. Forsyth (Supreme Court of the United States 1985, 472 U.S. 511)✓The Attorney General authorized a warrantless 1970 national security wiretap that caught the plaintiff's calls; the Court held the since-repealed Section 2511(3) disclaimer left the tap lawful under Title III, and that Mitchell had qualified immunity.
- United States v. United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan (Supreme Court of the United States 1972, 407 U.S. 297)✓The Attorney General approved warrantless wiretaps on members of a domestic group accused of bombing a CIA office; the Court read Section 2511(3) as a congressional disclaimer conferring no surveillance power, then held the Fourth Amendment required prior judicial approval.
- Forsyth v. Barr (Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit 1994, 19 F.3d 1527)✓Dallas police used, in an internal affairs probe of an officer, calls private parties allegedly intercepted illegally; assuming that was unlawful, the Fifth Circuit held Section 2517(1) and (2) allowed the disclosure and use, defeating the Section 2511(1)(c) and (d) claims.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Can an Employer Record Conversations Without Consent? (2026), Can I Record My Boss Harassing Me? State-by-State Legal Guide (2026), Can I Sue Someone for Recording Me on Private or Public Property?
Sources and References
- 18 U.S.C. 2511 -- Federal Wiretap Act(law.cornell.edu)
- FMCSA(fmcsa.dot.gov).gov
- Vermont DMV(dmv.vermont.gov).gov