Camden Westendorf
Associate Editor
Loyola University Chicago School of Law, JD 2028
In 2017, three Georgia Tech University graduates sought to create a dynamic automated license plate reader (ALPR) system to combat unsolved crimes in their community. Today, their company, Flock Safety, has rolled out more than 100,000 ALPRs in 6,000 communities across the United States. Additionally, as of August 9, 2026, the surveillance equipment company has solidified partnerships with nearly 5,000 law enforcement agencies. Partners of Flock Safety enjoy unfettered access to the company’s AI-powered database, where individual ALPRs record and upload traffic data into a searchable catalog of license plate numbers and other automobile identification markers, such as make, model, color, and even unique characteristics like scratches on automobiles. While ALPRs have historically been employed to regulate traffic safety and crime, Flock Safety has distinguished itself by allowing partnered law enforcement agencies the ability to provide government organizations access to data gathered on individuals across the country. Critics of the Flock Safety surveillance system note that the manipulation of such a sensitive compilation of data allows virtually any Flock Safety partner to surveil American citizens without a uniform system of compliance to regulate their access. Ultimately, the absence of federal regulation to restrain the authority of AI-powered ALPR systems allows both local law enforcement and federal agencies to abuse their access to these systems and violate the privacy of U.S. citizens.
The fight against Flock Safety
According to the American Civil Liberties Union, 2025 year-end reports denote multiple occurrences where both Flock Safety representatives and their partners blatantly misrepresented the capacity of the ALPR systems and the freedom law enforcement agencies have when using it. Specifically, Flock Safety’s purported goal of combatting crime is absent in the data collected by its cameras, as less than 1% of cars scanned were connected to any crime or wrongdoing. For instance, in 2025, a Texas police officer searched more than 83,000 Flock cameras to track a woman who was suspected of self-administering an abortion, even tapping into networks in states where abortion is legal. Additionally, on September 30, 2025, a Kansas Police Department accessed the Flock Safety network to track and investigate a man who wrote a critical op-ed about local ICE operations. In the same vein, on March 6, 2026, the Dallas Police Department searched “ICE + ERO” (Enforcement and Removal Operations) within the compilation of data, which in turn allegedly tapped into 6,674 camera networks and 77,771 individual cameras to target undocumented individuals surveilled by the network.
The omnipresence of this surveillance system poses a crucial question, what compliance measures restrict agencies from abusing their access to the Flock Safety network? The answer, none. No federal regulations currently exist to govern the use of ALPR systems, allowing agencies the unchecked ability to violate individual rights and civil liberties. In response, state governments, grassroots organizations, and individual communities have taken affirmative action to join the fight against Flock Safety. Per NPR, more than 30 localities have implemented measures to deactivate their ALPR systems, citing growing concerns of mass surveillance and obstruction of privacy. Open-source sites such as DeFlock.org support grassroot organizations mobilization against Flock cameras by allowing users to virtually protest and notify their communities of the cameras’ whereabouts. Several states, including Illinois and Connecticut, have enacted similar regulations on ALPRs to protect their constituents. Others have begun garnering bipartisan support for a bill restricting federal spending on ALPRs, spearheaded by Kentucky Republican Congressman Thomas Massie and California Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna.
Cameras are everywhere, but federal compliance measures aren’t
The abuse of ALPR systems highlights the need for federal regulations to check the exponential rise in the surveillance of Americans. While state and community-level actions have proven to be successful in dismantling these surveillance systems, the absence of federal involvement to protect Americans nationwide permits both federal and state law enforcement to run rampant in their political crusades against immigration, reproductive healthcare, and Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure.
This digital panopticon isn’t a dystopian scene from George Orwell’s 1984. It’s a real-life threat to freedom—to the right of Americans to live without constant government surveillance. It is not only an affirmative duty for elected officials to take a stand against the blatant exploitation and erosion of individual rights and liberties across the country; it is imperative that these leaders join the fight to protect and preserve the principles so vital to this country’s prosperity—liberty and justice for all.