North Dakota recording consent law for interviews: one-party, written as a defense

North Dakota is a one-party consent state, but it writes the rule as a defense rather than an exception. Under N.D.C.C. 12.1-15-02, intentionally intercepting a wire or oral communication is a class C felony, and it is a defense that "the actor was a party to the communication or one of the parties to the communication had given prior consent," provided the communication "was not intercepted for the purpose of committing a crime or other unlawful harm." An interviewer recording their own interview fits that defense. As of October 2026, the main cross-border risk is Montana, whose rule turns on whether everyone knew.

For a quick read on a call between two states, try the consent checker.

This page covers the statutory text, why the defense wording matters, phone, video and in-person interviews, penalties, calls to Montana, Minnesota and Canada, and a consent line to read aloud.

What does North Dakota's statute say?

Chapter 12.1-15 of the Century Code covers interception of communications. Section 12.1-15-02 has three parts:

The definitions in section 12.1-15-04 set the reach:

• Intercept is "the aural acquisition of the contents of any wire or oral communication through the use of an electronic, mechanical, or other device, or by secretly overhearing the communication."
• Oral communication is one "uttered by a person exhibiting an expectation that such communication is not subject to interception under circumstances justifying such expectation." A private interview usually qualifies.
• Wire communication is one made "in whole or in part" through wire or cable facilities operated by a common carrier, which covers phone calls.

Why does it matter that consent is written as a defense?

In most one-party states, recording by a participant is simply outside the offense. North Dakota instead defines the offense broadly and then lets a participant, or someone with a participant's consent, answer it. Two practical consequences follow:

1. Be able to show you were a party, or had a party's consent. For an interviewer that is obvious from the calendar invite and the recording itself. For someone capturing a call they did not join, it means getting a participant's agreement before the call and keeping a record of it.
2. The purpose condition is part of the defense. The defense needs both elements: party consent, and no purpose of committing "a crime or other unlawful harm." "Other unlawful harm" is broader than a crime. Recording to keep accurate hiring notes is not aimed at harm; recording to threaten a candidate or to expose something private about them could be.

Federal law applies to the same call and has a similar condition. Its consent exception, 18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(d), protects a party's recording "unless such communication is intercepted for the purpose of committing any criminal or tortious act."

Who counts as a party in an interview?

• The interviewer and every panel member. Each is a party and can rely on the defense for their own recording.
• A coordinator or colleague who is not on the call. Not a party. They need "one of the parties" to have given "prior consent," which means before capture starts, not after.
• A note-taking tool attending for someone absent. Its owner is not a party. A participant's prior consent brings it within North Dakota's defense, but the candidate's state may require more, so tell the candidate too.

Does the law cover phone, video and in-person interviews?

North Dakota's chapter speaks of wire and oral communications and does not mention electronic communications. A phone screen is a wire communication, and an in-person interview is an oral communication. A video interview's audio can fit either, depending on how it travels and where the speakers are, and federal law covers electronic communications directly with the same one-party rule for participants. The practical answer is the same in every format.

Is a transcript a recording under North Dakota law?

Treat it as one. North Dakota defines intercept as "aural acquisition," and the federal definition in 18 U.S.C. § 2510(4) is wider still: "the aural or other acquisition of the contents" of a communication through a device. A tool that listens to the audio in order to write the transcript is acquiring the contents. In North Dakota that is lawful for a party; in an all-party state, keeping only the text does not help.

What are the penalties in North Dakota?

• Interception, disclosure or use. A class C felony. Under N.D.C.C. 12.1-32-01, the maximum is "five years' imprisonment, a fine of ten thousand dollars, or both."
• Organizations. Under N.D.C.C. 12.1-32-01.1, an organization convicted of a class C felony faces a maximum fine of $50,000.
• Secret loitering. A class A misdemeanor, with a maximum of 360 days and $3,000.
• Civil. We did not find a civil damages section in chapter 12.1-15. The federal wiretap act gives a civil claim for unlawful interception under 18 U.S.C. § 2520, with statutory damages of "the greater of $100 a day for each day of violation or $10,000."

Disclosure and use are felonies on their own. An agency recruiter who passes a recording to a client, knowing it was made unlawfully, is exposed even if someone else made it.

What if the candidate is in Montana, Minnesota or Canada?

Western North Dakota borders eastern Montana, and oil field and construction employers there often hire across the line. Montana's rule is different. It makes it an offense to record a conversation "by use of a hidden electronic or mechanical device" without "the knowledge of all parties," with an exemption for people who were warned; see Montana recording consent law for interviews. A spoken warning at the start of the call takes care of it.

Minnesota and South Dakota are one-party states for participants, which covers most calls from Fargo and Grand Forks to Moorhead or from Bismarck to the south. Candidates in Manitoba and Saskatchewan fall under Canada's Criminal Code, which allows a participant to record, but Canadian privacy law adds notice duties for organizations. For any other state, check two-party consent states, and for how courts choose between two states' laws, see recording calls across state lines. The AI and notice rules that sit on top of recording law are in is it legal to record a job interview.

A consent line for North Dakota interviews

"Before we start: I'd like to [record / transcribe] this interview so
my notes for the [role] position are accurate. It's seen by [who] and
deleted after [period]. If you're calling from another state today, or
you'd rather I didn't, tell me and I'll take notes by hand. It won't
affect your application. Is that OK with you?"

[Clear yes: start capture. No or unsure: leave it off.]

The line doubles as Montana's warning and gives you a record that a party consented. Panel and email versions are in the interview recording consent script.

Checklist for North Dakota interviews

1. Ask every candidate before capture starts, in every format.
2. If you capture an interview you are not in, get a participant's prior consent and keep a record of it.
3. Give a spoken warning on calls with Montana candidates.
4. Record for note-taking, never as leverage.
5. Do not forward a recording you are unsure was made lawfully.
6. Treat transcripts and AI notes the same as audio.

North Dakota's place among the other one-party states is shown on one-party consent states.