Federal judge calls Flock search unconstitutional, as AOC and Bernie Sanders introduce bill to ban license plate readers

Daniel Sims

Posts: 2,590   +79
Staff
The big picture: While a federal judge's finding that an Oklahoma police officer's Flock database search was unconstitutional doesn't change legal precedent, it signals a shift in how the law views networked surveillance cameras. As communities across the US turn against the AI-powered devices, lawmakers have begun calling for new restrictions, and in some cases a federal ban.

Oklahoma federal judge Sara Hill described automatic license plate readers (ALPRs) as a form of indiscriminate mass surveillance, comparing them to dragnet-style searches. Her ruling suggests that networked cameras like those sold by Flock and Axon differ fundamentally from other police surveillance tools, with consequences for the law and for citizens' expectations of privacy.

In May, Tulsa County Deputy Sheriff Freddie Alaniz, parked along the side of a highway, saw a vehicle with a California license plate pass by and followed it solely because it bore out-of-state plates. After running the plate through Flock's AI-powered nationwide database, he pulled the car over, supposedly for changing lanes without a turn signal.

While questioning the driver, Melisa Kyle, Alaniz reviewed more than 50 instances in which Flock's cameras had detected her vehicle traveling across the country, and searched it on suspicion of drug trafficking. Although he found roughly 91 pounds of meth in Kyle's SUV, the court threw out the evidence, ruling that the Flock search lacked probable cause and a warrant.

Arguably the most important detail is that Hill declared the search a Fourth Amendment violation, breaking with prior rulings involving ALPRs.

Other judges have likened Flock cameras to other police surveillance methods and noted that drivers have no reasonable expectation of privacy on public roads. Hill, however, found that Flock's nationwide database puts it in a different category, giving officers a vast trove of data to search without a warrant on theoretically anyone traveling across state lines.

ALPRs, which use AI to automatically sort license plates from passing vehicles into a searchable database (sometimes inaccurately), have drawn fierce pushback across the nation. As officials question their impact on privacy and dozens of officers are caught using them for stalking, many communities are attempting to remove Flock cameras, and don't always succeed.

As surveillance companies weigh expanding into mobile drones, lawmakers are pushing back. Late last month, Florida Republican Rep. Greg Steube introduced a bill requiring warrants to use ALPRs.

Meanwhile, senators Bernie Sanders and Jeff Merkley, and representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez recently introduced the Ban Flock Act, which would bar federal agencies from using ALPRs and cut off federal funding for them.

Permalink to story:

 
So the police officer found a drug trafficker, with an amount that can severely damage or kill thousands of people, and that's bad ????????

If this violated the rights of the drug trafficker, how about the rights of the thousands of victims?
 
Bill to ban license plate readers?

How about rolling back the entire Patriot Act?!

Allowing unfettered total surveillance on US citizens except this one way is a meaningless political theatre to distract from the real problem.
One step at a time, we'll get there eventually
 
“While questioning the driver, Melisa Kyle, Alaniz reviewed more than 50 instances in which Flock's cameras had detected her vehicle traveling across the country, and searched it on suspicion of drug trafficking. Although he found roughly 91 pounds of meth in Kyle's SUV, the court threw out the evidence, ruling that the Flock search lacked probable cause and a warrant.”

So, the system did exactly what it said it would, the officer did his job (pattern recognition, welcome to probable cause 101) and this is a bad thing?

This exact situation is something Bill or Hillary Clinton (and almost all of society) would have been all over the media championing such a victory on drugs and crime 20, 25 years ago.

And now enough ignorance has been thrown into the mix, we’re throwing the baby out with the bath water.

GJ, can’t wait to see crime rates increase for absolutely zero good reason.
 
I support license plate readers.
There is no right to drive.
Driving is a privilege.
Those without insurance, inspection clearance or drivers licenses shouldn't be on our roads.
The license readers let the cops know immediately who to go after.

NEXT: I want the gun detectors from Total Recall.
 
I support license plate readers.
There is no right to drive.
Driving is a privilege.
Those without insurance, inspection clearance or drivers licenses shouldn't be on our roads.
The license readers let the cops know immediately who to go after.

NEXT: I want the gun detectors from Total Recall.
Unless there are sufficient systems to monitor usage and punish bad actors, holding departments accountable for screwups, such mass surveillance will only come back to haunt us.

How many innocent people have we seen get arrested because these Flock systems misread a plate? How badly were their lives disturbed, how much money did they have to spend to get themselves out of those situations? Because we know the police were never held accountable or made to pay for damages.

Add onto the fact that those who oppose these systems were labeled terroists by the company and by law enforcement personnel. We've gone far beyond useful toll into trying to shame people into accepting mass surveillance. A system that refuses to hold bad apples accountable does not need mass surveillance powers.
 
Bill to ban license plate readers?
How about roll back the entire Patriot Act?!
The 'Patriot Act' - even the name is chilling. Allow us to spy on you, detain you, and whisk you away with no due process or you aren't a 'patriot'. The thought-control in the US in double-plus good.
 
I am a staunch supporter in the legality of ALPR’s but the judge is right here. Driving behaviors is not probable cause to search a vehicle lol. It would’ve been reason to call a K-9 unit to establish probable cause.

This ruling doesn’t change anything about the fact that no probable cause is needed to review information collected by ALPR’s.

Here is an example I’ve cited before that showed ALPR’s stop drug traffickers. The ALPR itself was never used to establish probable cause but to make the officer’s job more efficient. Instead he called for a K-9 unit like I suggested:
 
Back