Flock cameras are increasingly coming up in the news as a bogeyman of the 2026 midterm elections in the United States—along with AIPAC, ICE, data centres, and AI.
Like other issues that started with young protesters, Flock cameras have now entered the mainstream campaign lexicon for the upcoming US midterms, wherein candidates' positions on the surveillance technology are seen as something of a litmus test.
What is 'Flock Safety'?
The privately held surveillance company, which uses image recognition technology to identify people through their license plates, known as automatic license plate readers (ALPR) was established in 2017 and is based in Atlanta. It holds contracts with property owners and law enforcement. Their approximately 120,000 cameras are used in more than 6,000 communities in nearly all 50 states, where they do billions of scans every month.
The company is best known for its automatic license plate readers and CCTV cameras, which are becoming increasingly ubiquitous. It is also working on developing broader surveillance systems.
How are they different than regular license plate readers?
Conventional license plate readers are generally used to detect drivers who are speeding and to identify people with criminal backgrounds. Flock cameras scan passing cars for their make, model, colour, location and other details—essentially creating a vehicle fingerprint—to then use the data at a later date.
Why are Flock cameras under scrutiny?
Their widespread deployment without the use of warrants has raised concerns over privacy violations. There are also questions over the constitutionality of the devices that surveille (without warrants) civilians who don’t necessarily have a criminal record.
The leaders of Flock have argued that their technology, through use by law enforcement, has helped catch criminals and find missing people.
Earlier this month, the American Civil Liberties Union released a statement on Flock cameras, saying, “Automatic license plate reader (ALPR) companies like Flock Safety are quietly trying to build a nationwide mass surveillance system. If there are Flock cameras in your city, they are tracking, logging, and sharing your movements without a warrant.”
They go on to describe the system of Flock cameras (the largest of a growing number of such companies) as terrifying.
In a recent campaign ad, Connie Chan, who is running for Congress in San Francisco to replace Nancy Pelosi, accused her opponent, Scott Wiener, of being in support of Flock.
“Right now, our federal government is tracking our personal data and selling it without our knowledge and permission,” Chan says in her campaign ad.
“Across the country, Flock system is using AI in mass surveillance, using that technology to assist ICE, stalk women, monitor protesters, and follow people follow people who have never been suspected of a crime,” she continues. Flock have said they don't work with ICE.
She goes on to say that all federal funding for Flock should be stopped and AI and mass surveillance in general should be prohibited. She also says that Flock is influencing the Democratic Party by helping block bills that would require more transparency in the use of surveillance. She notes that Wiener and a Flock employee (a Democratic Party official) have cross-endorsed one another.
How are states responding?
In response to public outrage over Flock cameras, some states have enacted regulations. Florida has banned the cameras from state highways; Washington state has the first statewide regulations on ALPRs; California killed a bill that would regulate Flock cameras.
How are people protesting Flock cameras?
Protests against Flock cameras have largely been led by young people. On social media platforms, such as TikTok, some Flock opponents have given guidance on how to destroy Flock cameras without being detected. The destruction of Flock cameras has led some cities to cancel their contracts with the company.