Flock cameras become flashpoint in midterm races as privacy concerns grow

Automated license plate readers made by Atlanta-based Flock Safety have become a prominent issue in the upcoming midterm elections, with candidates from both major parties voicing opposition or calling for stricter oversight. The cameras, which the company says operate in 6,000 communities across every state except Alaska, record license plates and vehicle characteristics, allowing law enforcement to search and share the data.

Supporters, including many police chiefs, describe the technology as a vital crime-solving tool. Flock Safety says its cameras have helped solve roughly one million crimes and assisted in reuniting about 10,000 missing people with their families. However, critics argue the pervasive network amounts to warrantless mass surveillance, and the debate has become intertwined with broader concerns about the power of technology companies and the growth of artificial intelligence.

In Pennsylvania, Democratic Governor Josh Shapiro said he would support a statewide ban, while his Republican opponent, Treasurer Stacy Garrity, also called for banning the cameras. Wisconsin's gubernatorial race has been dominated by the issue, with Democratic nominee David Crowley highlighting his order limiting their use in Milwaukee County and pledging strict transparency laws. His Republican opponent, Tom Tiffany, has proposed pausing state funding and creating a task force on privacy protections.

The issue has also surfaced in races for Congress and statehouses. In Texas, Democratic Senate candidate James Talarico declared the cameras have no place in the state. A Michigan congressional candidate called them "un-American," while in Florida, a Senate candidate is selling merchandise that reads "FLORIDA NEEDS TO GET THE FLOCK OUT." Rhode Island's governor paused new camera installations just weeks before the primary, citing privacy concerns.

Law enforcement groups have pushed back against the criticism. Mitchell Davis III, police chief in Hazel Crest, Illinois, and president of the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives, called the technology "invaluable" and warned that removing it would be a mistake. He argued for proper guidelines and accountability rather than outright bans.

President Donald Trump said his administration is studying the issue. Experts suggest the debate reflects a wider societal discomfort with new technologies. "There's a real synergy between the camera systems and this greater societal discomfort with AI and technology in general," said Cayce Myers, a professor at Virginia Tech. For some residents, like Josh Chavez in West Texas, the cameras symbolize a partnership between government and Big Tech that expands surveillance at the expense of citizens.