The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) have filed a lawsuit against the city of San Jose, California, over its implementation of Flock’s automatic license plate reading (ALPR) surveillance system. The legal challenge asserts that the city’s deployment of nearly 500 ALPRs has created an extensive surveillance network that violates the privacy rights of its residents. The lawsuit contends that the system’s retention of location data for up to a year is particularly invasive, setting San Jose apart from other California agencies that do not maintain such long-term records. This case is part of an ongoing legal battle against Flock’s technology, with similar lawsuits already in motion in Norfolk, Virginia, where efforts are being made to shut down the corporation’s surveillance network entirely.
The legal action was filed on behalf of the Services, Immigrant Rights & Education Network and Council on American-Islamic Relations, California, who argue that the system’s pervasive monitoring infringes on constitutional protections and privacy laws. The lawsuit seeks to mandate that law enforcement agencies obtain a warrant before accessing the ALPR data, which has become a critical point in the debate over the balance between public safety and individual privacy. The case highlights the broader implications of such technology, as it raises concerns about potential misuse, including targeting of specific communities and the creation of a permanent surveillance infrastructure that affects daily life for residents.
Efforts to challenge Flock’s surveillance practices have gained traction as concerns grow over the implications of mass data collection. In Norfolk, Virginia, a similar lawsuit is being pursued, with the goal of discontinuing the use of Flock’s technology in the city. The legal actions reflect an increasing pushback against the expansion of surveillance systems, particularly in response to their potential impact on civil liberties and the right to privacy. As these cases progress, they may set important legal precedents that could influence the regulation of such technologies in the future.