Illinois Prohibits Recording Teachers in Classroom

While teachers do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their classrooms under federal law, school districts in Illinois cannot audio tape what teachers say in the classrooms, an Illinois appellate court found.

The Board of Education for Freeport School District No. 145 sought to audio and videotape teachers in two special education classrooms after parents raised concerns about the safety of their children following allegations of abuse by a former teacher.

The current teachers sought to block the audio recording under the Illinois Eavesdropping Act, 720 ILCS 5/14-2(a)(1). The statute generally prohibits the audio taping of conversations without all parties’ consent.

The school district removed the case to federal court arguing the taping violated their rights under the Fourth Amendment concerning unlawful searches. The federal court found classrooms were public places and that “any expectations of privacy concerning communications taking place in special education classrooms such as those subject to the proposed audio monitoring in this case are inherently unreasonable and beyond the protection of the Fourth Amendment.” The federal court remanded the case back to state court to determine if the proposed audio taping of the teachers violated the Illinois Eavesdropping Act.

The state court granted summary judgment finding that the Eavesdropping Act prohibited audio recordings in the classroom but allowed video recordings to continue. The appellate court found that there is no exemption in the Act to allow audio recording in the classroom and that such an exemption would have to come from the legislature, not the courts.

The appellate court stated that “audio taping in the special-education classrooms at issue is not the only means of protecting the teachers and students. As is evident from the facts in this particular case, the classrooms are videotaped, teacher aides are generally present in the classrooms, and teachers are subject to periodic evaluation.”

The appellate court also rejected the school district’s argument that the teachers gave their implied consent to the taping. “Application of the doctrine of implied consent is not appropriate in the present case because the plaintiffs’ consent cannot be inferred; there is a direct expression regarding the plaintiffs’ consent. Specifically, the plaintiffs filed a verified complaint affirmatively stating that they do not and will not consent to being audio taped while teaching.” In addition, the court said the district “cannot compel employees to relinquish their statutory rights” under the Eavesdropping Act.

Denise Plock et al. v. Board of Education of Freeport School District No. 145, Ill. App. Ct., 2nd Dist. No. 2-08-0879, issued December 8, 2009.