Flock Safety, a leading vendor of automated license plate readers (ALPRs), is facing a mounting backlash across the United States as citizen protests, contract cancellations, and a new federal investigation challenge its widespread surveillance network. Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) this week announced an investigation into Flock's data practices, while the Institute for Justice (IJ) published a database documenting 93 local governments that have terminated ALPR contracts, amid growing public concern over warrantless mass surveillance.
A mischief-maker in a Darth Vader suit recently endorsed Flock at a San Diego city council meeting, urging the city to "continue utilizing Flock technologies so that we can follow and surveil the rebel scum." While intended as satire, the appearance highlights the intense debate surrounding automated license plate readers (ALPRs) and their role in law enforcement.
Around the US, citizens have been protesting and sometimes vandalizing the company's network of surveillance cameras. The advocacy has caused some governments to change course, with government officials, commonly hesitant to second-guess law enforcement practices, becoming concerned enough to question these mass surveillance systems.
Senator Josh Hawley on Wednesday wrote to Flock CEO Garrett Langley to announce an investigation of "Flock Safety's collection, retention, and dissemination of data gathered by its artificial intelligence cameras." The Hawley investigation follows a growing number of local governments cancelling or choosing not to renew their contracts with Flock and other makers of ALPRs.
The Institute for Justice (IJ), a Virginia-based legal advocacy non-profit, published a new database that tracks the termination of local government ALPR contracts. As of Wednesday, the database documents 93 local governments that canceled ALPR contracts. The IJ, which is challenging ALPR use on Fourth Amendment grounds in Norfolk, Virginia and San Jose, California, previously published a database that documents police abuse of ALPRs, a topic addressed in Hawley's letter. Incidents include romantic stalking, wrongful traffic stops and detentions, and other forms of misconduct.
"I think what's happened is that the American public has woken up to the mass surveillance that quietly arose around them," said Robert Frommer, senior attorney at IJ, in an interview with The Register. "And they don't like it."
Frommer attributed the increase in cancellations and protests to more news attention being paid to real-life abuses of the technology, as well as the Supreme Court's recent decision in a geofence case where SCOTUS ruled that cops need a warrant to grab location data.
ALPRs, from vendors like Flock, Motorola Solutions, and PlateSmart, among others, capture license plates whenever cars drive by, along with geodata and potentially images of people. This data can be combined with other information, effectively putting all passersby under constant surveillance without any warrant.
"I think what we're seeing now is the reaction to that," said Frommer, who explained that the problem with Flock cameras is that they're accessible to anyone with login credentials, without any authorization from a supervising authority. "You don't need to go to a judge and get a warrant," Frommer explained. "You don't need anything. And when you basically give that search power to the bored officer in his cop car in the middle of a shift, it inevitably happens that they start using it and start misusing it, whether to look people up personally or whether to investigate people at political protests."
These sorts of issues, Frommer said, have made people question whether we should live in a panopticon. The IJ's litigation and its Plate Privacy Project follow from the belief that there are solutions, whether they come from the courts or lawmakers. Pointing to Hawley's letter, he said that this is not just a state or local issue, but has become a federal concern.
Analysis
Why This Matters
- For the average American: This surveillance technology tracks your vehicle's location continuously without a warrant, and has been abused by law enforcement for stalking, wrongful stops, and political protest monitoring.
- Broader significance: The backlash signals a potential shift in the balance between public safety and privacy rights, with implications for the future of mass surveillance technologies like facial recognition and AI-powered cameras.
- What happens next: The federal investigation could lead to new regulations or limits on ALPR data collection and retention, potentially reshaping the business model of Flock and similar companies.
Background
Automated license plate readers (ALPRs) have been deployed by law enforcement across the US for over a decade, with Flock Safety emerging as a dominant vendor. The cameras capture license plate numbers, timestamps, and geolocation data, storing them in centralized databases accessible to police departments. Unlike traditional surveillance requiring a warrant, ALPR data can be queried by any officer with login credentials, raising Fourth Amendment concerns.
The Institute for Justice has been tracking ALPR use and abuse, documenting incidents of police misconduct including romantic stalking and wrongful detentions. In 2024, the Supreme Court ruled in a landmark geofence case that police need a warrant to obtain location data from tech companies, a decision that has strengthened legal arguments against warrantless ALPR surveillance.
Senator Josh Hawley's investigation marks the first major federal scrutiny of Flock Safety, while local governments from small towns to major cities have begun canceling contracts. The Darth Vader incident at the San Diego council meeting, though theatrical, exemplifies the public's growing discomfort with constant monitoring.
Key Perspectives
Civil liberties advocates (Institute for Justice): Argue that ALPRs constitute warrantless mass surveillance that violates the Fourth Amendment. They emphasize that easy access by individual officers leads to predictable misuse, and that the technology creates a "panopticon" where everyone is tracked indiscriminately. They support the federal investigation and local contract cancellations.
Law enforcement and Flock Safety: View ALPRs as a valuable crime-fighting tool, useful for locating stolen vehicles, solving crimes, and finding missing persons. Flock has argued that its cameras help reduce crime and that data is stored securely. The company has not publicly commented on the Hawley investigation or the contract cancellations, but likely lobbies for continued adoption.
Critics and skeptics: Question whether the benefits of ALPRs justify the privacy costs, noting that misuse is inherent when surveillance power is broadly distributed. Some argue that the technology disproportionately impacts marginalized communities and that public protest is the only effective check on its expansion. The Darth Vader stunt highlights the absurdity of the surveillance state, but also the seriousness of the issue.
What to Watch
- Number of additional contract cancellations tracked by the Institute for Justice database over the next quarter
- Senator Hawley's investigation findings and any proposed federal legislation or regulations
- Supreme Court or lower court rulings in Fourth Amendment challenges to ALPR use, particularly in Norfolk and San Jose
- Flock Safety's response to the federal investigation, including any changes to data retention policies or access controls