Flock Safety announced Wednesday it has updated its policies governing searches of its nationwide license-plate database ahead of a Senate hearing examining the company’s surveillance practices. The changes come as senators raise concerns about privacy protections and the scale of the company’s network, which now includes more than 120,000 cameras across 49 states.
Flock modifies search justification requirements
Flock Safety confirmed it has revised the process for law enforcement and other users to justify searches in its database of billions of license-plate scans. Previously, users were required to provide a reason for searches, but the company acknowledged that the free-text system allowed for explanations that were not always specific. The updated policy now mandates more detailed justifications for searches, according to a letter sent to Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO).
Senate hearing highlights privacy and Fourth Amendment concerns
The Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism held a hearing Wednesday to examine Flock Safety’s surveillance network and broader issues related to license-plate readers. Lawmakers questioned the company’s data collection practices, storage duration, and search protocols, with Hawley emphasizing the need for transparency.
Hawley, who chairs the subcommittee, criticized Flock and other surveillance companies for declining invitations to testify. He highlighted concerns about the network’s potential to reconstruct a vehicle’s travel history over time, stating that Flock customers could “assemble a pattern of life” from the data.
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL), the subcommittee’s ranking member, acknowledged that license-plate readers have existed for years but noted that the scale of Flock’s network is unprecedented. Durbin stressed the need to balance privacy and security in addressing the technology’s rapid expansion.
Company defends network as tool for law enforcement
Flock Safety maintains that its network allows law-enforcement agencies to share vehicle evidence across jurisdictions, with searches subject to audit controls. The company has not publicly detailed the specific changes to its search justification requirements beyond the letter to Hawley.
The hearing follows growing scrutiny of surveillance technologies and their implications for civil liberties. Lawmakers and witnesses at the hearing raised questions about potential errors in the system and the risks of unrestricted access to vehicle-location data.