Senators Introduce 'Ban Flock Act' to Prohibit Federal Use of AI-Powered License Plate Readers

The "Ban Flock Act," introduced on Friday, October 2, 2026, by Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), and Senator Jeff Merkley (D-OR), seeks to comprehensively prohibit the federal government from utilizing automated license plate readers (ALPRs) and accessing their collected data. This legislation directly targets Flock Safety, the largest vendor of ALPRs in the U.S., which operates over 120,000 cameras nationwide, recording an estimated 20 billion vehicles monthly. Beyond a federal ban, the bill proposes to cut off federal grant funding to state and local governments that continue to use or contract with ALPR companies and would empower Americans to sue the federal government for privacy violations stemming from ALPR use. This aggressive legislative push underscores growing bipartisan alarm over the pervasive and often unregulated deployment of AI-powered surveillance technologies, which critics argue are rapidly moving the U.S. towards a "surveillance state".

The core concern revolves around the sheer scale and nature of data collection by modern ALPR systems like those from Flock Safety. Unlike earlier, more limited ALPRs primarily used for "hot list" checks on stolen vehicles or wanted suspects, current AI-enhanced systems capture far more than just license plate numbers. Flock's technology records vehicle make, model, color, body type, and distinguishing features like bumper stickers or dents, creating a detailed "vehicle fingerprint". This information, paired with time and location stamps, is uploaded to a massive, searchable database, often shared across thousands of law enforcement agencies nationwide with minimal oversight. Sanders and other proponents of the bill highlight how this data can be used to track individuals' movements to sensitive locations such as doctors' offices, schools, or protests, effectively creating a persistent record of their lives without consent or suspicion of wrongdoing. Recent reports have documented instances of law enforcement officers misusing ALPR data to stalk individuals, including ex-partners, and to investigate activists, raising serious civil liberties and Fourth Amendment concerns. The ACLU notes that less than 1% of cars scanned by ALPRs are linked to any crime, yet millions of records of innocent drivers are stored, often indefinitely.

This proposed ban marks a significant escalation in the ongoing debate over surveillance technology, moving beyond calls for regulation to outright prohibition for federal entities and financial disincentives for local ones. Historically, ALPR technology, first developed in the UK in 1976 and adopted by the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol in 1998, focused on vehicle identification for specific criminal investigations or border security. Early mobile ALPR systems were expensive, costing $18,000 to $25,000 per unit, limiting their widespread adoption. However, the proliferation of fixed ALPR systems and the integration of AI have dramatically reduced costs and expanded capabilities, making them ubiquitous in many communities. While Flock Safety asserts that its ALPRs do not use facial recognition, do not sell customer data, and offer governance controls for data sharing and retention, critics argue these safeguards are insufficient against the inherent mass surveillance capabilities. The company's database, reportedly comprising over 20 billion vehicle scans monthly, represents an unprecedented repository of movement data.

The "Ban Flock Act" directly challenges the current fragmented regulatory landscape. Federally, explicit ALPR regulation is "nonexistent," and only sixteen states have enacted some form of regulation, with policies varying widely on data retention, use, and sharing. This lack of consistent oversight has allowed federal programs, such as the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA) initiative, to aggregate ALPR data from local law enforcement, often circumventing local restrictions and feeding into larger federal databases like the DEA's National License Plate Reader Program. This backdoor access to localized data by federal agencies, without clear accountability, is a key driver behind Sanders' bill. While courts have generally upheld the constitutionality of ALPRs, distinguishing them from continuous cellphone tracking, the growing scope and potential for misuse are pushing legislative boundaries.

The impact of such a ban would be substantial. For Flock Safety and its rivals like Motorola Solutions, Axon, and Genetec, a federal prohibition and the loss of federal funding for local partners would significantly curtail their market, particularly in government contracts. It would force a re-evaluation of business models heavily reliant on widespread deployment and data aggregation. For civil liberties advocates, this bill represents a crucial step in reining in what they view as unchecked government and corporate surveillance, protecting fundamental privacy rights in an increasingly digital world. Conversely, law enforcement agencies that credit ALPRs with solving serious crimes, including homicides, kidnappings, and auto thefts, would face a significant blow to their investigative capabilities. Some argue that ALPRs provide "objective data" that can quickly reconstruct vehicle movements, leading to swift arrests.

Looking ahead, the "Ban Flock Act" faces a challenging path through Congress, despite some bipartisan concern over ALPR abuses, as evidenced by Senator Josh Hawley's (R-MO) "Stop Flock Abuse Act," which proposes safeguards rather than an outright ban. The debate will likely center on balancing public safety needs against individual privacy rights, with proponents of ALPRs citing their effectiveness in crime reduction and opponents emphasizing the dangers of mass surveillance and potential for abuse. Even if a full federal ban proves elusive, the introduction of this bill signals a growing legislative appetite for stricter regulation, data retention limits, and robust accountability mechanisms for ALPR technology. The increasing integration of AI into surveillance tools will only intensify this scrutiny, pushing for clearer legal frameworks to prevent the inadvertent creation of a ubiquitous surveillance infrastructure that erodes civil liberties.