Exception to preemption

(a) In general A State law may modify, limit, or supersede the provisions of section 3, or subsection (a) or (b) of section 4, with respect to State law only if that State law— (1) either— (A) constitutes an enactment or adoption of the Revised Uniform Law on Notarial Acts, as approved and recommended for enactment in all the States by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws in 2018 or the Revised Uniform Law on Notarial Acts, as approved and recommended for enactment in all the States by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws in 2021, except that a modification to such Law enacted or adopted by a State shall be preempted to the extent such modification— (i) is inconsistent with a provision of section 3 or subsection (a) or (b) of section 4, as applicable; or (ii) would not be permitted under subparagraph (B); or (B) specifies additional or alternative procedures or requirements for the performance of notarizations with respect to electronic records or for remotely located individuals, if those additional or alternative procedures or requirements— (i) are consistent with section 3 and subsections (a) and (b) of section 4; and (ii) do not accord greater legal effect to the implementation or application of a specific technology or technical specification for performing those notarizations; and (2) requires the retention of an audio and visual recording of the performance of a notarization for a remotely located individual for a period of not less than 5 years after the recording is created. (b) Rule of construction Nothing in section 5 or 6 may be construed to preclude the recognition of a notarization under applicable State law, regardless of whether such State law is consistent with section 5 or 6.