Sen. Hawley Questions Flock Safety's Surveillance Network Amid Privacy Concerns

<p>Senator Josh Hawley is seeking information from Flock Safety regarding its expanding network of AI-powered cameras and whether it has contributed to a searchable national database of Americans' movements. This inquiry comes as various communities across the United States discontinue the use of the technology due to increasing privacy concerns.</p><p>"Flock has assembled an unprecedented national surveillance network," Hawley, a Republican from Missouri, stated in an interview with Fox News Digital. "They boast more than 120,000 cameras across 49 states and more than 20 billion vehicle scans every month."</p><p>Hawley is investigating the access to data on hundreds of millions of Americans and its usage, emphasizing that Americans deserve clarity on these matters.</p><p>Robert Frommer, director of the Institute for Justice’s Project on the Fourth Amendment, highlighted that the primary issue is not merely the presence of cameras but the ability of police to search an individual's past movements without a judicial warrant. "The No. 1 reform that I think is needed here is a warrant," Frommer said, advocating for judicial approval before utilizing such surveillance tools.</p><p>Frommer noted that while police should be able to respond to emergencies, they should justify any searches conducted without a warrant afterward. He stated, "Most law enforcement searches occur within a few days of a crime, and there is no need to maintain a vast database of everyone's movements."</p><p>Hawley, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism, initiated the investigation through a letter to Flock CEO Garrett Langley. He expressed concerns that Flock’s camera network exceeds the intended use of surveillance tools for local investigations.</p><p>"Instead of serving discrete local investigations, these camera networks harness artificial intelligence to pool what they capture into a national database that customers can search," Hawley wrote.</p><p>Flock’s automated license plate reader cameras capture details such as vehicle license plates, descriptions, locations, and timestamps. The company markets its technology to law enforcement agencies, businesses, and homeowners associations.</p><p>In response to Hawley’s letter, Flock Safety spokesperson Paris Lewbel stated that the company would address the subcommittee's inquiries directly. "We look forward to working with Senator Hawley and the Subcommittee to provide additional context about how our technology works, the safeguards built into our platform, and how law enforcement agencies use Flock to solve crime and find missing people," Lewbel said.</p><p>Hawley emphasized that while law enforcement requires tools to apprehend offenders and ensure community safety, Americans should not have to compromise their privacy during routine activities. He stated, "Americans do not surrender their privacy rights when they drive to work, drop their kids off at school, or go to church."</p><p>Representative Keith Self, a Republican from Texas, supported Hawley’s concerns, asserting that the Fourth Amendment should not be compromised. He referenced Benjamin Franklin’s warning against sacrificing essential liberty for temporary safety.</p><p>Frommer remarked that Flock’s assertion that agencies control their data-sharing settings does not alleviate privacy issues, as those agencies can be linked to broader networks than they realize.</p><p>The scrutiny of Flock comes as more cities and counties reconsider their partnerships with the company due to concerns over data sharing and potential misuse. Recently, the Pflugerville City Council in Texas voted unanimously to terminate its agreement with Flock, deciding to deactivate all 28 automated license plate reader cameras covered by the contract.</p><p>Pflugerville Mayor Doug Weiss stated, "Public safety and public trust have to go hand in hand, and recent revelations about the Flock system have fueled concerns throughout the community; we can’t engage with organizations we can’t trust."</p><p>Pflugerville police had utilized Flock cameras since 2020 but lost confidence in the company’s ability to meet the city’s privacy and security standards.</p><p>Flock’s spokesperson, Lewbel, acknowledged Pflugerville’s decision and noted that the city had participated in Texas’ statewide sharing network, which she described as distinct from one-to-one sharing between agencies.</p><p>In Hood County, Texas, the Commissioners Court voted to end its relationship with Flock and directed the disconnection of the county’s three cameras. Constable John Shirley shared that the cameras were unplugged and covered, stating, "Today is a good day for the Freedom of the people of Hood County."</p><p>Shirley expressed support for technology that aids police in solving crimes but emphasized the need for boundaries to protect individual liberty. He stated, "We can have good policing and still insist on boundaries."</p><p>Tempe, Arizona, has also ceased its use of Flock cameras and will not replace the system, citing concerns over the potential misuse of automated license plate reader systems.</p><p>Frommer concluded that constitutional concerns regarding surveillance extend beyond Flock to any provider of interconnected license plate reader technology, emphasizing the need for safeguards regardless of the company involved.</p>