Across the United States, candidates from both major parties are increasingly using Flock surveillance cameras as a campaign target, reflecting voter unease with powerful technology companies and broader debates surrounding artificial intelligence and data infrastructure.
These AI-powered cameras, sold by Atlanta-based Flock Safety, record license plates and other vehicle characteristics, creating a searchable database for law enforcement. The company states its cameras are operational in 6,000 communities across every state except Alaska. While police assert the cameras are vital for crime prevention, critics argue their widespread deployment constitutes unconstitutional warrantless mass surveillance.
In Wisconsin, candidates for governor have voiced opposition. Democratic nominee David Crowley, who has previously supported initiatives to make Wisconsin an AI and data hub, highlighted an order he issued limiting Flock camera use in Milwaukee County and pledged to implement strict transparency and accountability laws if elected governor. His Republican opponent, U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, stated he would pause state funding for the cameras and establish a task force for stronger privacy protections, misuse penalties, data retention limits, and safeguards against foreign adversaries. The Wisconsin Democratic Party released a clip of Tiffany previously stating he did not know what Flock cameras were, while the state Republican Party criticized Crowley for his past support of surveillance technologies.
Pennsylvania's gubernatorial candidates also hold firm stances. Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro, seeking reelection and considered a potential White House contender in 2028, has indicated support for a statewide ban. His Republican opponent, Treasurer Stacy Garrity, described the cameras as an "intrusive invasion of privacy" and called for a ban.
In Rhode Island, Democratic Gov. Dan McKee paused the installation of new cameras weeks before the state's primary, citing privacy and transparency concerns. His primary challenger, former CVS executive Helena Foulkes, questioned McKee's timing but agreed that a review of data usage was necessary.
Elsewhere, a Michigan congressional candidate labeled the cameras “un-American,” while his opponent co-sponsors legislation to ban federal agencies from using such technology and to prevent state and local governments from using federal funds for their purchase. In Florida, where the state recently ordered the removal of automated license plate readers from highway rights-of-way, a Democratic Senate candidate's campaign is selling merchandise opposing the cameras.
Flock Safety, founded in 2017, has faced a growing backlash this year amid increased awareness of its network's reach, ongoing litigation over constitutional questions, and media reports detailing instances of officers misusing the technology.
MoMo Zhou, Flock's vice president of communications, emphasized the technology's crime-solving capabilities, stating it has helped solve approximately one million crimes and reunite roughly 10,000 missing people with their families. Zhou urged engagement with the facts, including the safeguards in place, and called for collaboration with communities to establish governing rules, rather than spreading misinformation or banning the tool outright.
However, some law enforcement officials advocate for strict guidelines rather than outright bans. Mitchell Davis III, chief of police in Hazel Crest, Illinois, and president of the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives, described the technology as "invaluable" and found the discourse around eliminating it to be "disturbing." He suggested focusing on proper guidelines and accountability for misuse instead of discarding the technology.
Cayce Myers, an attorney and professor at Virginia Tech University specializing in privacy issues, noted a synergy between surveillance systems like Flock cameras and a broader societal discomfort with AI and technology. He anticipates surveillance technologies will continue to be a significant political issue.
This growing awareness and debate over privacy and surveillance technology are shaping political discourse as candidates navigate voter concerns about the expanding power of tech companies.