Lawsuit Argues Warrantless Use of Flock Surveillance Cameras Is Unconstitutional
A civil liberties organization has filed a federal lawsuit in Virginia arguing that widespread surveillance enabled by Flock, a company that sells networks of automated license plate readers, is unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment.
“The City of Norfolk, Virginia, has installed a network of cameras that make it functionally impossible for people to drive anywhere without having their movements tracked, photographed, and stored in an AI-assisted database that enables the warrantless surveillance of their every move. This civil rights lawsuit seeks to end this dragnet surveillance program,” the lawsuit notes. “In Norfolk, no one can escape the government’s 172 unblinking eyes,” it continues, referring to the 172 Flock cameras currently operational in Norfolk. The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures and has been ruled in many cases to protect against warrantless government surveillance, and the lawsuit specifically says Norfolk’s installation violates that.
Flock cameras, which are called automated license plate readers (ALPRs) have become incredibly popular all over the United States. More than 5,000 communities around the country have the cameras, which use AI to passively and constantly check which cars are driving by them. Flock has made several incredibly lofty claims over the years, which includes “Flock will have eliminated crime in America in 10 years.”
