Hawaii Has No Windshield-Mounting Ban, and a Dash Cam Falls Outside Every Closed List

Start with the equipment-approval statute, because it is the one that decides whether an aftermarket device may lawfully be used at all. HRS §286-83(a) lists what needs the director of transportation's type approval before it may be sold for use on a vehicle: "any head lamp, auxiliary or fog lamp, rear lamp, signal lamps, or reflector, which reflector is required by law, or any glazing material, hydraulic brake fluid, or seat belt assembly as defined in section 291-11.6." Subsection (c) then bars using "any device mentioned in this section" without that approval. The list is exhaustive and a recording camera is not among its eight items, so a dash cam needs no Hawaii approval and its use triggers no offense under Part IV of chapter 286.

The tint statute cannot be stretched to cover a camera either, because the term it operates on is defined by purpose. HRS §291-21.3 defines "sun screening devices" as "products or materials used or designed to be used in conjunction with glazing materials for the purpose of reducing the effects of the sun, including, but not limited to tinting films and perforated sun screening materials, but excluding louvered materials." A camera that records is not used to reduce the effects of the sun, so it never enters §291-21.5 in the first place, and the eleven-item exemption list in §291-21.5(e), which descends to rear trunk lid handles and hinges, window wipers and wiper motors, is simply not the list that governs it. Two items on that list do bear on where a camera can sit without covering something the law protects: signs, stickers or other materials are confined to a seven-inch square in the lower corner of the windshield farthest from the driver and a five-inch square in the corner nearest the driver, and transparent film along the top edge must not encroach on the AS-1 portion of the windshield, or must sit no lower than four inches below the top of the windshield measured from the middle point of the bottom edge of the top windshield moulding where no AS-1 marking can be found. Behind the mirror or in the top strip is therefore the natural mounting position.

Hawaii's obstruction offense is narrower than most. HRS §291C-124(a) applies where a vehicle is "so loaded, or when there are in the front seat such a number of persons, exceeding three," as to obstruct the driver's view or interfere with control of the driving mechanism. Subsection (b) reaches a person, animal or object held in the driver's lap or allowed in the driver's immediate area, but only one "which interferes with the driver's control over the driving mechanism of the vehicle," and subsection (c) reaches a passenger riding in a position that blocks the view or interferes with control. A camera bracketed to the glass is not a load, not an occupant, and does not interfere with the steering, pedals or gear selector, so it falls outside all three.

Using the camera is not the same as using a phone. HRS §291C-137(a) prohibits operating a motor vehicle while using a mobile electronic device, but subsection (e) defines "use" as "holding a mobile electronic device while operating a motor vehicle," and defines the device itself as portable equipment "capable of providing wireless or data communication between two or more persons or of providing amusement." A mounted, record-only camera is neither held nor within that definition. Where a driver picks the camera up in traffic, the analysis flips and the $300 fine in §291C-137(f) becomes live.

Because no Hawaii statute prohibits the mount, there is no citation for having one. The exposure lies in the adjacent rules. Using a device that is on the §286-83 list without the director's approval is a violation of Part IV of chapter 286, fined under HRS §286-82 at not more than $1,000, so a camera sold as a combined unit with an auxiliary lamp or with replacement glazing would drag itself onto that list through the lamp or the glass rather than through the camera.

Handling the device while driving engages §291C-137, a traffic infraction under §291D-2 carrying a $300 fine, rising to $400 in a school zone or construction area as defined in §291C-104. Section 291C-137(h) also supersedes any county ordinance regulating the use of mobile electronic devices while driving, which matters in a state where all local traffic ordinances come from four county councils rather than from cities. If a camera is mounted so that it genuinely blocks the view, the charge would have to be built on §291C-124, and on its terms that requires a load, front-seat occupants exceeding three, an object in the driver's lap or immediate area interfering with control of the driving mechanism, or a badly positioned passenger, none of which describes a bracketed camera.

On the recording itself, HRS §803-42(b)(3)(A) makes interception lawful for a person not acting under color of law who is a party to the communication or where one party consented, unless the recording is made to commit a criminal or tortious act.