Congress moves to rein in AI license-plate cameras after wrongful arrests
Two new bills from across the political spectrum would restrict how police and companies like Flock use AI-linked license plate cameras, after cases of wrongful arrests and misuse came to light.
What happened: Within three days, two very different bills landed in Congress to curb AI-powered automatic license plate reader (ALPR) cameras, the kind made by Flock Safety and rivals like Motorola and Axon. Sen. Josh Hawley, a Republican, introduced the 'Stop Flock Abuse Act' to add guardrails to police use. Sens. Bernie Sanders and Jeff Merkley, with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, went further, proposing to ban federal use of ALPRs entirely and strip funding from states that deploy them.
Why it matters: These cameras read and store plate numbers on a mass scale, letting police search a nationwide, AI-searchable database of where cars have been. A Florida woman, Lindsey Isaacs, spent 13 days in jail, including over three days in solitary confinement, after a bad match from a similar-model car. Five Indianapolis officers were arrested after allegedly running improper personal searches. A researcher says the network is bigger than Flock admits: over 170,000 cameras versus the company's stated 120,000.
How it works, plainly: Hawley's bill would stop ALPR firms from selling driver data to non-government buyers, require written approval and supervisor audits before officers can search, mandate encryption, cut data retention from 30 days to 10, and ban pairing the cameras with facial recognition. The Sanders-Merkley-AOC bill is blunter: no federal ALPR use at all, no federal money for states that use them, and a legal right for Americans to sue the government over violations.
The rollout: Flock says it supports 'guardrails' legislation and calls the cameras a proven public safety tool, but the ACLU argues the bills don't go far enough and wants an outright ban. A security researcher who found an exposed Flock access token that let him pull location data says the company responded with a cease-and-desist and told customers he was a 'malicious actor.' Whether either bill gets a vote this year is unclear, but lawmakers expect the fight to continue into next year.
