Smart glasses that can silently record video have long occupied a grey area in public spaces. Now, courts in England and Wales have moved decisively to close that loophole, announcing a formal ban on Meta glasses inside all judicial buildings managed by His Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service. Anyone who shows up wearing a pair will have them confiscated at the door and returned only when they leave.
The move follows a similar ban introduced by New York’s court system and reflects a rapidly growing unease about wearable recording technology in sensitive environments. It also arrives at a moment when Meta glasses are facing pushback from restaurants, pubs, theatres, and now courtrooms on both sides of the Atlantic.
Why Courts Are Drawing a Hard Line
The reasoning from HMCTS is straightforward. UK law already prohibits taking images or video inside court buildings without official permission, and violations can be prosecuted as contempt of court. Smartphones are permitted on the condition they are not used for recording, but officials made clear that no equivalent exception would apply to smart glasses.
The distinction matters. A smartphone held up to record is obvious. Meta glasses record with a small pulsing LED light that many people nearby may never notice, raising the risk of covert capture in proceedings where privacy and integrity are paramount. Earlier this year a judge in the high court accused a claimant of wearing smart glasses to receive coaching during cross-examination, an episode that underscored exactly how disruptive the technology could become inside a courtroom.
In California, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s own security detail was seen wearing the glasses during a high-profile social media addiction trial. The judge threatened contempt of court proceedings if any footage had been captured. These incidents, taken together, created unmistakable pressure on court authorities to act.
A Wider Privacy Backlash Taking Shape
Courts are joining a longer list of venues choosing to exclude the glasses entirely rather than rely on users following the rules. Wetherspoons and a range of independent restaurants and theatres in the UK have all announced bans driven by privacy concerns. The glasses have attracted the unflattering label of pervert glasses in some coverage, tied to fears that they could be used to film people, particularly women, without their knowledge or consent.
Meta sold roughly seven million pairs last year at prices ranging from £269 to £469. The company maintains that a tamper-resistant pulsing light warns bystanders when recording is active, but critics argue that awareness of the feature is still far too low among the general public for that safeguard to carry much practical weight.
What This Means If You Are Thinking About Buying
For consumers who have been weighing up whether Meta glasses are worth the investment, the growing wave of venue bans is a factor worth taking seriously. Owning a device you cannot bring into courts, certain restaurants, theatres, or pubs limits its real-world usefulness considerably. Before committing to a purchase, it is worth mapping out where you would actually use them and whether those spaces are likely to remain welcoming to the technology as regulatory pressure continues to build.
