Public-Record & Mugshot-Law Updates

For most of the internet era, the legal picture was simple: arrest records and the photos taken at booking are public records in the United States, and publishing public records is broadly protected. That baseline has not disappeared, but a second layer has been built on top of it. Lawmakers in a growing number of states have turned their attention away from whether booking photos can be published and toward how they are exploited commercially.

The clearest example is the wave of statutes aimed at the practice of charging people to remove their own booking photo from a website. Some states now prohibit that fee-for-removal model outright, others require removal on request in defined circumstances, and a few limit how commercial sites may solicit or republish booking images at all. Banks and payment processors have at times added their own pressure by declining to handle pay-to-remove transactions. The result is a patchwork: the same conduct can be perfectly legal in one state and prohibited next door, which is why no single national rule can be stated with confidence — and why this section frames the trend rather than pretending it is uniform.

The shift has not been confined to legislatures. Major search engines have, over the past few years, introduced ways for people to ask that certain personal information be removed from their results, and some platforms have adjusted how booking-photo content is surfaced or ranked. These are company policies rather than laws, so they can change at any time and offer no guarantee, but together with the statutory changes they mark a broader reconsideration of how long an unproven accusation should dominate a person’s online presence. We track the parts of that shift that actually affect what someone can do about a record, and leave the speculation to others.

The business model that drew the most criticism worked like a trap. An operator would collect booking photos in bulk, publish them in a searchable form so they ranked highly when someone’s name was searched, and then offer to take a given photo down for a fee — often steep, and sometimes only to have the same image reappear on a sister site. People who had never been convicted of anything — who remained, in the eyes of the law, presumed innocent — or whose cases were dismissed, found themselves paying repeatedly to clean up a record of a mere accusation.

Critics, and eventually legislators, treated that as coercion dressed up as a service. The reforms that followed share a common thread: a public record should not be turned into leverage against the person it describes. That principle is the line between an exploitative site and a responsible one. It is why we do not charge for removal or correction, why every request is reviewed by a person rather than routed to a paywall, and why we publish our reasoning about treating people in these records with dignity. If a listing here is about you, the path to have it reviewed is free and is described below.

Going forward, this page is where we will explain developments that actually affect people who appear in public records: new or amended state laws on booking-photo publication and removal, notable court decisions, changes in how major platforms and search engines handle this kind of content, and shifts in our own review practices when they are relevant to the public. The aim is practical rather than political — to translate changes into what they mean for families searching for someone, for the individuals listed, and for anyone trying to use these records responsibly.

Where an entry touches your situation, we will point you to the right place to act, whether that is our charge guide, the family-help guide, or the removal process. Until a development is confirmed and sourced, we would rather say less than publish a rumor — which is why what you see here is background you can rely on rather than a feed of unverified headlines.

Is it legal to publish mugshots and arrest records?

In the United States, arrest records and booking photos are generally public records, and publishing them has long been lawful. What has changed is the rules around how they are used commercially — a number of states now restrict charging people to remove their own booking photo, and some limit republication by commercial sites. The details vary by state and continue to evolve.

Why do some sites charge to remove a mugshot?

A handful of operators built businesses around posting booking photos and then charging the people pictured to take them down. That pay-to-remove model is exactly what many state laws were written to curb, and it is the opposite of how a responsible record resource should work. Our removal and correction review is free, and no one ever has to pay to have a record about them reconsidered.

Do these laws mean my record will come down automatically?

No. Laws restricting commercial practices do not erase the underlying public record, which still exists with the court and the arresting agency. If you want a listing on this site reviewed for correction or removal, you need to submit a request — it is free, read individually, and you do not need a lawyer to ask.

How current is the information in this section?

These entries are written as evergreen background on how public-record and mugshot-publication rules work and where they are heading, rather than as time-stamped news bulletins. Because laws differ by state and change over time, treat anything here as general information and confirm the current rule in your state with an official source or an attorney.

• Request a Removal or CorrectionHow our free review and removal process works.
• Understanding Criminal ChargesWhat a listed charge means and why it is not a conviction.
• Help for Families & FriendsFinding someone and making sense of a record.
• All ResourcesThe full index of guides and tools on the site.
• Why We Don’t Shame AnyoneOur dignity stance on publishing public records.