Flock surveillance cameras, an AI-powered network that records license plates and vehicle characteristics, have emerged as a significant campaign issue across the United States, with candidates from both parties attacking the technology as debates over artificial intelligence and data privacy intensify.
Candidates are calling for bans, restrictions, or increased oversight of the cameras, sold by Atlanta-based Flock Safety, which operates in thousands of communities nationwide. Critics argue the technology amounts to unconstitutional warrantless mass surveillance, while law enforcement agencies maintain it is an invaluable crime-fighting tool. Flock Safety states its cameras have aided in solving approximately one million crimes and reuniting around 10,000 missing people with their families.
"We’ve seen candidates running on banning them, cutting off funding, or requiring warrants. That’s a credit to activists across the country who have raised concerns about their use," said Michael Soyfer, an attorney for the Institute for Justice, a public interest law firm.
MoMo Zhou, Flock's vice president of communications, urged engagement with the facts, highlighting the technology's role in solving crimes and reuniting families, while emphasizing the safeguards already in place. "We ask them to work with the communities using this technology to decide what rules should govern it and not to spread misinformation or ban a critical public safety tool outright that is helping to make communities safer," Zhou stated.
While license plate reader technology has existed for decades, Flock, founded in 2017, has faced a surge in backlash. This increased scrutiny coincides with growing awareness of the network's reach, ongoing litigation over constitutional questions, and media reports documenting instances of officers misusing the technology.
In various gubernatorial and congressional races, the cameras have become a focal point. In Pennsylvania, Democratic gubernatorial candidate Josh Shapiro has voiced support for a statewide ban, a position echoed by his Republican opponent, Stacy Garrity, who called the cameras an "intrusive invasion of privacy."
Wisconsin's gubernatorial race has seen the issue dominate. Democratic nominee David Crowley, who previously ordered limits on Flock camera use in Milwaukee County, pledged to implement strict transparency and accountability laws if elected. His Republican opponent, U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, proposed pausing state funding and forming a task force to establish stronger privacy protections and safeguards against foreign adversaries.
Similar debates are unfolding in other states. In Rhode Island, Democratic Gov. Dan McKee paused new camera installations citing privacy concerns. In Michigan, a congressional candidate labeled the cameras "un-American," while his opponent co-sponsors legislation to restrict their use by federal agencies. In Florida, where automated license plate readers are being removed from state highway rights-of-way, a Senate candidate is campaigning against the technology.
Conversely, some law enforcement officials advocate for the technology's continued use. Mitchell Davis III, chief of police in Hazel Crest, Illinois, and president of the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives, described the cameras as "invaluable" and expressed concern over communities eliminating them. He suggested focusing on proper guidelines and accountability for misuse rather than outright bans.
Analysts note a growing public discomfort with artificial intelligence and pervasive surveillance technologies. "I think there’s a real synergy between the camera systems that we’re talking about and also this greater societal discomfort with AI and technology in general," said Cayce Myers, an attorney and professor at Virginia Tech University. "It seems obvious that new surveillance technologies will continue to become a major political issue."