Sanders Proposes Ban on Federal Automatic License Plate Readers

Senator Bernie Sanders has introduced legislation that would ban the federal government from using Flock Safety's automatic license plate reader (ALPR) technology, extending restrictions to all such systems. The bill represents the most significant legislative pushback yet against a technology that has quietly proliferated across American law enforcement agencies. Flock Safety, a Georgia-based company, has become the dominant provider of licence plate readers to police departments and now operates one of the largest surveillance networks in the country, with cameras deployed in residential neighbourhoods across thousands of jurisdictions.

Automatic licence plate readers are ostensibly designed to help law enforcement locate vehicles involved in crimes. The cameras photograph every licence plate that passes them and run the plates through databases to check for stolen vehicles, wanted suspects, or vehicles matching descriptions from crime scenes. In theory, this is a legitimate investigative tool. In practice, the technology has become a pervasive surveillance system that tracks the movements of millions of people who are never suspected of any crime.

The scale of Flock's operation is staggering. The company's cameras process over 1 billion licence plate reads per day according to their own statements. Flock maintains a searchable database of historical reads going back years, allowing law enforcement to query where a specific vehicle has been at any point in the past. This creates a de facto national tracking system with minimal legal oversight or warrant requirements in many jurisdictions.

Flock has positioned itself as a public safety company, often deploying cameras in residential neighbourhoods in partnership with homeowner associations and local governments. The marketing emphasises crime prevention and neighbourhood security. But the technology is fundamentally about surveillance. Every car passing a Flock camera is tracked and recorded, regardless of whether that person is suspected of anything. Routine trips to the doctor, the grocery store, the gym, or a political rally are now permanently recorded in a database accessible to law enforcement.

The Legal and Privacy Concerns

Sanders' bill addresses a genuine constitutional problem that courts have begun to recognise but haven't yet fully resolved. The third-party doctrine, a legal principle that you have no expectation of privacy in information shared with third parties, has historically meant that police can access licence plate data without a warrant. They don't need to justify the search or show probably cause because they're just asking a private company for data, not searching your home or directly monitoring you.

But the proliferation of comprehensive tracking systems has begun to challenge this doctrine. Courts have recognised that tracking someone's movements over time is qualitatively different from knowing about a single trip or location. The Supreme Court hinted at this reasoning in Carpenter v. United States, a 2018 case involving cell phone location data. If comprehensive movement tracking requires a warrant for phone data, there's a logical argument that it should also require a warrant for comprehensive vehicle tracking through licence plate readers.

Sanders' bill takes a more direct approach: instead of waiting for courts to parse out the constitutional boundaries, it simply prohibits federal agencies from using the technology. This includes the FBI, DEA, ICE, and other federal law enforcement agencies that have increasingly turned to Flock for investigations. The bill would also apply to state and local police forces that receive federal funding, which covers most departments in the country.

The scope is broader than just Flock. The legislation would ban automatic licence plate readers generally, meaning any technology that captures and records licence plate information would be prohibited. This is a significant step because it's not just about regulating one company, it's about rejecting an entire category of surveillance technology.

Opposition and Political Complications

The bill faces substantial opposition. Law enforcement agencies argue that licence plate readers are essential for solving crimes, locating wanted suspects, and recovering stolen vehicles. They point to specific cases where the technology helped. Flock has significant lobbying power and relationships with local governments that have become dependent on the technology for funding their own surveillance networks.

There's also a bipartisan complexity here. While Sanders is leading on privacy grounds, support for the bill might come from unexpected quarters. Right-wing critics of federal government power might oppose federal surveillance infrastructure. Civil liberties groups have consistently opposed licence plate readers. But police unions and the law enforcement establishment will fight hard against restrictions.

Flock Safety's response has been measured. The company has argued that licence plate readers don't raise the same privacy concerns as facial recognition technology. They've also worked with privacy advocates on some limited guardrails, like allowing individuals to opt-out if they register their vehicle. But these limitations don't address the fundamental issue: the technology enables comprehensive movement tracking with minimal oversight.

What Happens Next

Sanders' bill is unlikely to pass in the current Congress, where law and order politics remain influential and bipartisan agreement on surveillance is rare. But the fact that a major senator is proposing a ban signals that privacy concerns around licence plate readers are reaching critical mass.

As more people become aware that their vehicle movements are being tracked and recorded in searchable databases maintained by a private company and accessible to law enforcement without warrants, political pressure will increase. The question isn't whether licence plate reader restrictions will eventually come, it's when and how comprehensive those restrictions will be. Sanders' bill is early movement in what will likely be a long campaign.