Is it legal to record phone calls in South Dakota?
Yes, generally. South Dakota is a one-party consent state: you may record a phone call you take part in without telling the other person, because your own consent satisfies the rule. Recording calls you are not part of is illegal. When the other person may be in an all-party consent state like California or Florida, disclose the recording anyway.
What South Dakota law says
South Dakota follows one-party consent for phone calls, consistent with the federal Wiretap Act: as long as one participant — and you count — consents, the recording is lawful. The rule covers conversations you participate in; intercepting other people’s calls remains a crime. Bear in mind the rule protects you within South Dakota — interstate calls can implicate stricter states’ laws, which is why professionals default to disclosure.
South Dakota is a one-party consent state. It is a felony for a non-participant to intercept a wire, electronic, or oral communication without any party's consent. If you are on the call, your own consent is enough — no announcement required.
"It is unlawful for any person who is not a party to a communication to intercept any wire, electronic, or oral communication unless the interception is authorized by this chapter or by the laws of the United States." "It is lawful under this chapter for a person to intercept a wire, electronic, or oral 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." — S.D. Codified Laws § 23A-35A-20
South Dakota's one-party consent mirrors federal law under 18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(d). A recording lawful under South Dakota law is generally lawful under federal law for participant recordings. Because South Dakota lacks a state civil wiretap remedy, federal § 2520 is often the primary civil path for illegal interception victims.
South Dakota's structure inverts many wiretap statutes: instead of listing recording as an exception to a general ban, § 23A-35A-20 criminalizes interception only by outsiders who lack any party's consent. If you are a participant, your own consent satisfies the statute — no disclosure, beep, or written permission needed. A third party may record with one participant's prior consent, which is why undercover officers and confidential informants routinely wear wires. Oral communications are protected only when the speaker has a reasonable expectation of privacy; conversations in public where privacy is not reasonable fall outside the chapter. South Dakota does not provide a state statutory civil remedy for wiretap violations — victims must look to federal law under 18 U.S.C. § 2520 or common-law tort theories.
| Consent rule for phone calls | One-party consent |
| Recording calls you're part of | Allowed — your own consent is sufficient. |
| Calls with people in other states | The stricter state's rule may apply — when in doubt, disclose. |
What breaking the law costs in South Dakota
Illegal interception by a non-participant is a Class 5 felony (up to 5 years and a $10,000 fine under S.D. Codified Laws § 22-6-1).
South Dakota's wiretap chapter does not create express state statutory civil damages. Federal civil remedies under 18 U.S.C. § 2520 may apply, along with common-law invasion-of-privacy claims.
Exceptions worth knowing
- One-party consent when the recorder is a party or has one party's prior consent (§ 23A-35A-20)
- Oral communications with no reasonable expectation of privacy
- Law enforcement interception under court order or statutory emergency authority
- Communication common carriers acting in the normal course of business
How South Dakota courts have ruled
Statutes set the rule; cases show how it plays out when a recording ends up in front of a judge. These are real, decided cases under South Dakota law.
What happened: An undercover agent recorded a marijuana sale with only the informant's consent and no prior court order; Woods argued the recording was an illegal interception of an oral communication.
The ruling: The court held that when one participant consents, there is no justified expectation of privacy and the conversation is removed from the type of interception prohibited by Chapter 23A-35A.
What happened: Highway patrol troopers activated a hidden audio recorder in their patrol car and recorded inculpatory statements the defendant made while seated in the front passenger seat after a traffic stop.
The ruling: The Supreme Court affirmed admission of the recordings, applying South Dakota's one-party consent framework to trooper-initiated recording during a lawful stop.
What happened: Prosecutors obtained court-authorized wire and oral interceptions in a drug investigation and the defendants challenged the intercept orders and amendatory orders.
The ruling: The Supreme Court upheld the intercept orders where probable cause and statutory procedures were satisfied, distinguishing court-authorized third-party wiretaps from one-party consent participant recordings.
Personal calls vs. business calls in South Dakota
Recording personal calls
You can record your own phone calls in South Dakota without telling the other person. Documenting an harassing ex, a landlord dispute, or a scammer by recording calls you are on is standard and lawful under § 23A-35A-20. You cannot tap someone else's line or hide a recorder to capture conversations between other people without one party's consent.
Recording business calls
Sioux Falls and Rapid City businesses may record customer service calls when an employee is a party — no announcement is legally required for purely intra-South Dakota calls, though disclosure remains best practice. Outbound call centers must still comply with all-party states when dialing California, Washington, or other strict jurisdictions.
Calls that cross state lines
South Dakota has no leading appellate decision on which state's law governs cross-border calls. A recorder in South Dakota is protected at home, but calling into an all-party state without everyone's consent can still create exposure in that state. Follow the strictest rule on any interstate line.
The safe way to record in South Dakota
Whatever the local rule, one habit covers every situation: say the call is being recorded at the start. Consent is then on the recording itself, and cross-border calls stop being a legal puzzle. Callmark can play "This call may be recorded" automatically on your calls, so the disclosure never depends on your memory.
For the full national picture — every all-party state, cross-border rules, and consent mechanics — see our state-by-state consent guide.
Sources and further reading
Statutes, court opinions, and reference guides cited on this page. Laws change — verify current text before relying on it for anything consequential.
Common questions
Yes. As a participant in the call, your consent satisfies South Dakota’s one-party rule. Disclosure is still wise whenever the other party might be in an all-party consent state.
Courts have applied different states' laws to interstate calls, and you often can't verify where a mobile number is. The practical rule: assume the strictest state applies and disclose the recording.
In most states, continuing a call after a clear "this call may be recorded" announcement is treated as implied consent — the same mechanism customer-service lines rely on.
Yes. S.D. Codified Laws § 23A-35A-20 allows a party to record without notifying other participants. Your own consent is sufficient.
Yes, if you are not a party and lack any participant's consent. Illegal interception by a non-participant is a Class 5 felony.
Generally yes, if speakers have no reasonable expectation of privacy. The wiretap chapter only protects oral communications made under circumstances justifying a privacy expectation.
Yes, when the employer or a consenting employee is a party to the call. Secretly intercepting employee calls that no consenting participant is on remains illegal.
South Dakota's wiretap chapter does not provide express state civil damages. You may have remedies under federal law (18 U.S.C. § 2520) or common-law privacy torts.
Record responsibly in South Dakota, automatically.
Built-in disclosure · automatic transcripts and summaries · 200 minutes included
Get Callmark