New York has become the first state to prohibit AI-enabled smart glasses and other recording-enabled eyewear in all state courthouses. The new policy reflects growing concern over the ability of these devices to discreetly capture audio, video, photographs, and AI-generated transcripts. Below are answers to some common questions about the new rule and what it may signal for how organizations approach this technology.
Are AI Glasses Permitted in New York Courts?
Effective July 20, 2026, according to a memorandum by New York’s Office of Court Administration Executive Director, Justin Barry, on July 1, 2026, the New York State Unified Court System prohibits visitors from bringing smart glasses and other eyewear or headwear equipped with cameras, microphones, or other recording technology into any New York state courthouse. The prohibition applies to more than 1,200 state, county, city, town, and village courts throughout the state.
“This prohibition applies to all individuals entering court facilities, including litigants,
attorneys, witnesses, family members, UCS employees, and all other individuals who seek to enter a UCS facility for any reason.”
Why did New York adopt this policy?
The court system explained that AI-enabled smart glasses present unique challenges because they can record proceedings, conversations, and participants without being readily apparent to others. The statewide rule is intended to reinforce existing prohibitions on unauthorized recording in court facilities and to protect the integrity of judicial proceedings, confidential communications, and courthouse security.
Are prescription smart glasses prohibited?
Yes. Individuals who wear prescription smart glasses are expected to bring a conventional pair of prescription glasses if they need to enter a courthouse.
Is New York the first state to take this step?
New York appears to be the first state to implement a statewide prohibition applicable to every state court. However, courts in other jurisdictions have already begun restricting smart glasses through local rules, courthouse policies, or individual judicial orders. As adoption of AI-enabled wearables accelerates, additional statewide restrictions would not be surprising.
Why should organizations care about a courthouse policy?
For starters, lawyers and litigants who are not aware, or think they will get a pass, may show up at court with prescription AI glasses. According to the memorandum, “no individual possessing smart glasses will be permitted to enter a UCS facility unless they voucher the smart glasses for safekeeping by uniformed personnel while the individual remains in the facility.” Without a backup pair of conventional glasses, they will not be able to enter the facility and participate in their case.
The New York policy also reflects a broader trend. Organizations across many industries are recognizing that existing “no recording” policies often were not drafted with AI-enabled wearable devices in mind. Smart glasses may continuously capture audio, video, images, location information, and AI-generated summaries while appearing no different from ordinary eyewear.
What are the broader legal and compliance issues with AI glasses?
There are many. We summarized a range of issues in our four-part series examining the legal and practical implications of AI-enabled smart glasses:
- Part 1: Biometrics, facial recognition, and emerging privacy concerns.
- Part 2: Audio recording, wiretapping, and consent laws.
- Part 3: Workplace privacy, surveillance, and labor law considerations.
- Part 4: Cybersecurity, data governance, and incident response implications.
What are some terms an organization should consider including in a policy on these devices?
A short list includes:
- Defining AI-enabled wearable devices covered by the policy;
- Recording in the workplace;
- Protection of confidential and proprietary information;
- Attorney-client privileged communications;
- Customer and employee privacy;
- Visitor access policies; and
- Appropriate use of AI-enabled technologies.
Are other organizations taking similar action?
Yes. Courts are only one example. Law firms, healthcare providers, schools, financial institutions, retailers, entertainment venues, and other organizations are evaluating whether to restrict or regulate AI-enabled smart glasses in sensitive environments. Some organizations have already prohibited their use in conference rooms, client meetings, secure facilities, or other locations where confidential information is routinely discussed.
What is the takeaway?
New York’s action demonstrates that organizations are beginning to move beyond generic recording-device policies and adopt rules specifically addressing AI-enabled wearable technology. As smart glasses become increasingly sophisticated and widely used, organizations should expect additional legislation, court rules, and organizational policies governing their use.
For organizations that have not yet evaluated the implications of AI-enabled smart glasses, now may be an appropriate time to review workplace policies, security protocols, and AI governance programs to determine whether they adequately address this rapidly evolving technology.