Overview

There is no country that bans owning or wearing smart glasses in public. Every restriction falls into one of three categories: property rules at private venues, existing recording laws applied to new hardware, or new policies written specifically for camera-equipped eyewear. This page is a running reference of every known ban, organized by category.

Courts and legal systems

Courts were the first institutions to act at scale, driven by concerns about covert recording of witnesses, jurors, and proceedings.

Statewide bans

| Jurisdiction | Effective | What it covers | |---|---|---| | New York Unified Court System | July 20, 2026 | All 1,240 state and local courts in 62 counties. Any eyewear or headwear with recording capability, including prescription models. Glasses must be surrendered to court officers at entry. First statewide ban in the U.S. |

City/county court bans

| Jurisdiction | Effective | What it covers | |---|---|---| | Philadelphia First Judicial District | March 30, 2026 | All FJD buildings and courthouses. Smart/AI-integrated eyewear with audio or video recording banned. Criminal contempt and arrest possible. Exceptions only with prior written permission. | | Montgomery County, Pennsylvania | May 2026 | All judicial facilities. No recording-capable eyewear without express written permission. | | Forsyth County, North Carolina | November 10, 2025 | Courthouse ban on all recording devices including smart glasses, phones, smartwatches, and cameras. Exemptions for judges, attorneys, law enforcement, credentialed media, and medical devices. |

Federal court bans

| Jurisdiction | Effective | What it covers | |---|---|---| | Western District of Wisconsin | February 6, 2025 | Smart glasses (Meta, Google Glass, any recording-capable eyewear) on prohibited-items list. Phones allowed but no recording in courtrooms. | | District of Hawaii | June 2025 | All courthouse areas including public spaces, courtrooms, and jury areas. Prescription smart glasses included. | | District of Colorado | Proposed September 2025 | Draft rule prohibiting smart glasses from federal courthouses. Staff authorized to scan eyewear. Status unconfirmed. |

Case-specific orders

| Court | Date | What happened | |---|---|---| | Los Angeles Superior Court | February 18, 2026 | During a social-media addiction trial, Judge Carolyn Kuhl ordered Meta team members to remove Ray-Ban Meta glasses after they wore them in the courtroom. Warned that anyone who recorded must delete footage or face contempt. | | London High Court | February 2026 | In UAB Business Enterprise v Oneta Limited, a judge rejected witness testimony after discovering the witness wore smart glasses connected to a phone for real-time coaching during cross-examination. |

Schools and exams

National exam bans

| Authority | Effective | What it covers | |---|---|---| | College Board (SAT) | March 2026 | Smart glasses — including prescription models — explicitly prohibited during all SAT testing. Proctors trained to spot and confiscate. Test scores canceled for violations. | | South Korea CSAT | November 2025 | AI smart glasses banned in all exam halls nationwide after May 2025 cheating incidents. Schools authorized to use metal detectors. |

State and district bans

| Jurisdiction | Effective | What it covers | |---|---|---| | Utah SB 69 | July 1, 2026 | Bell-to-bell ban on cellphones, smartwatches, and "emerging technology" during school hours. Covers all public schools. | | Alabama FOCUS Act | 2025–2026 school year | Bans student possession of wireless communication devices including smart glasses during the instructional day. Devices must be off and stored off-person. |

University policies

| Institution | What it covers | |---|---| | UConn Center for Students with Disabilities | Meta AI glasses prohibited during CSD exams. | | Cal State Fullerton School of Nursing | Smart glasses strictly prohibited in all instructional and clinical settings unless explicitly authorized. Violations may result in removal from clinical setting, exam invalidation, or conduct referral. |

Gyms and fitness centers

Gym bans are driven by changing-room privacy and the difficulty of distinguishing smart glasses from conventional eyewear.

| Venue | Location | Effective | Policy | |---|---|---|---| | Kingdom Gyms | Birmingham, UK | December 2025 | Recording glasses (such as Meta smart glasses) not permitted. Conventional photography still allowed with consent. | | Flight Fitness | UK | July 2026 | Does not accept any brand of smart glasses. Must remove on entry and store or cover. Refusal to comply means ejection without refund. | | PureGym | UK (340+ locations) | Ongoing | No photographs or videos on premises without permission. Policy applies to discreet recording via smart glasses. |

No major U.S. gym chain has announced a formal smart-glasses policy as of July 2026. Most gyms prohibit recording in changing rooms and restrooms under existing rules but have not addressed the gym floor.

Cruise ships

| Cruise line | Effective | What it covers | |---|---|---| | MSC Cruises | July 2025 | Smart glasses not allowed in ships' public areas. Includes Google Glass, Ray-Ban Meta, and any device capable of discreet recording. Allowed in private cabins and ashore. Port security may confiscate. | | Royal Caribbean | February 2026 | Smart glasses with audio/video recording banned in casinos, public restrooms, youth program areas, and medical areas. Chief security officer and captain may confiscate. Prescription wearers told to bring non-smart backup pair. | | Carnival Cruise Line | Current | "Google-type glasses" permitted in public areas but cannot be worn during embarkation/debarkation gangway operations. |

Movie theaters

The theater industry was among the first to address wearable recording devices, driven by piracy concerns.

| Authority | Effective | What it covers | |---|---|---| | MPAA + NATO (US industry) | October 2014 | Zero-tolerance policy for any recording device while movies are shown, including wearable devices. Must be off and put away at showtime. Federal penalty up to 3 years for in-theater recording. | | Alamo Drafthouse | June 2014 | Google Glass banned from auditoriums once lights dim. | | Cinema Exhibitors' Association (UK) | July 2014 | Recommended policy: customers should not bring wearable tech capable of recording into auditoriums whether or not a film is playing. |

Casinos

| Authority | Effective | What it covers | |---|---|---| | Nevada Gaming Control Board | May 2014 | Encouraged casinos to prohibit smart glasses on gaming floors and while playing any gambling game. Cited cheating risk from covert computing and card sharing. | | Caesars Palace | May 2013 | Confirmed ban under existing Nevada gaming regulations that prohibit computers and recording devices while gambling. |

Concert and event venues

| Venue | Date | Policy | |---|---|---| | Co-op Live, Manchester | March 2026 (Harry Styles concert) | Smart glasses, smartwatches, and all recording devices banned from event space. Phones placed in Yondr pouches. Disposable cameras provided. | | TivoliVredenburg, Utrecht | September 2025 | Camera glasses banned in house rules after a Rotterdam festival incident where a man used camera glasses to film women in restrooms. | | Masters Tournament, Augusta National | April 2026 | Strict no-camera policy. Staff trained to spot Ray-Ban Meta glasses. At least one fan's glasses confiscated until leaving grounds. |

Military and government facilities

| Authority | Effective | What it covers | |---|---|---| | U.S. Air Force | January 9, 2026 | Unauthorized to wear smart glasses with photo, video, or AI capabilities while in uniform. Cited operational security. Some installations extended the ban to civilians. | | U.S. military SCIFs | Long-standing | All personally owned portable electronic devices with recording or transmitting capability are prohibited in Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities. Smart glasses fall under this category. |

Workplace policies

| Employer | Effective | What it covers | |---|---|---| | Delta Air Lines | July 2025 | Frontline employees (including flight attendants) may not wear personal AI smart glasses on duty unless airline-issued. First U.S. carrier with a formal ban. | | Southwest Airlines | March 1, 2026 | Staff may not wear or use devices capable of discreet audio/video capture while on duty or representing the airline off-site. |

Driving restrictions

| Jurisdiction | Status | What it covers | |---|---|---| | Illinois HB 4843 | Passed June 2026, awaiting governor's signature | Adds "artificial intelligence smart glasses" to prohibited electronics while driving. No hands-free exemption (stricter than phones). Fines from $75; crash involvement could bring criminal charges. | | United Kingdom | Ongoing since 2013 | Department for Transport stated Google Glass likely illegal while driving under existing Road Traffic Act (treated like phone distraction). |

West Virginia and Delaware proposed smart-glasses driving bans in 2013–2014 but neither passed.

Bars and restaurants (historical — Google Glass era)

During the Google Glass era (2013–2014), at least 13 bars and restaurants in San Francisco banned the device, along with several in Seattle. Notable early bans:

  • The 5 Point Cafe (Seattle) — March 2013: First known U.S. business to ban Google Glass
  • Molotov's (San Francisco) — February 2014: "No recording on the premises" after a Glass-related incident
  • The 500 Club, The Willows, Sycamore, Zeitgeist, Acquerello (San Francisco) — 2014

The advocacy site StopTheCyborgs.org distributed free "no Glass" signage to any venue that wanted it. The cultural term "Glasshole" entered common usage during this period.

No equivalent organized ban campaign against Ray-Ban Meta glasses has emerged in bars and restaurants, likely because the current generation of smart glasses is visually indistinguishable from standard frames — operators cannot identify them by sight.

What the ban landscape tells us

Three patterns emerge from this list:

Bans are reactive. Almost every restriction followed a public incident — the Zuckerberg courtroom appearance, the Rotterdam restroom filming, the I-XRAY demonstration, the rizz camming investigations. Policies arrive after the damage is documented.

Enforcement depends on identification. Every ban listed above assumes the venue can identify smart glasses at the door. This worked for Google Glass, which had a distinctive prism display. It does not work for Ray-Ban Meta, which shares its frame design with non-smart Ray-Ban Wayfarers. Courts require self-reporting and voluntary surrender. Gyms post signs. Neither approach addresses a wearer who does not comply.

Detection fills the gap between policy and enforcement. A venue can adopt a no-smart-glasses policy, but enforcing it requires knowing which glasses have cameras. Radio-based detection — reading the Bluetooth and Wi-Fi signals that smart glasses broadcast to function — provides the identification layer that visual inspection cannot.