Public opposition to Flock Safety's automated license plate reader (ALPR) cameras is escalating from local city council meetings to the halls of Congress, with lawmakers preparing legislation that would cut federal funding to agencies deploying the technology and communities across the country reconsidering its use.

The growing backlash comes amid mounting evidence that Flock's technology has been used in ways critics say extend well beyond its stated purpose of investigating crimes and locating missing persons.

Federal Legislation Proposed

Kentucky Congressman Thomas Massie announced on X that he plans to introduce legislation withholding federal funding from municipalities and law enforcement agencies that deploy ALPR systems, including Flock cameras.

I'll soon be sponsoring a bill to withhold federal money from municipalities and police departments that deploy Flock (and other style) cameras to surveil law abiding citizens. pic.twitter.com/FGzE69psxS
— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) July 25, 2026

The announcement (via X) comes as debates over surveillance technology have intensified, including previously proposed House legislation that would require warrants for government AI surveillance. Massie's approach would target the technology through federal funding conditions rather than imposing operational requirements such as warrant thresholds or retention mandates. There is currently no comprehensive federal law governing how ALPR data is collected, retained, or shared, leaving oversight to a patchwork of state statutes and local policies that vary widely in their restrictions.

Misuse of License Plate Data

A recent report by The Institute for Justice identified over two dozen cases nationwide in which officers resigned or were arrested for allegedly using ALPR systems to stalk current or former romantic partners. CNN has also reported on the growing pattern of surveillance abuse.

In February, Milwaukee prosecutors charged an officer accused of using the system to track a romantic partner and her former partner. In July, an internal affairs detective who had investigated that same case was arrested after authorities alleged he also used Flock to track people for personal reasons.

Privacy advocates have flagged broader uses of the technology as well. The Electronic Frontier Foundation reported that agencies searched license plate databases during protests, including the No Kings protests in 2025. That same year, the group documented that Texas deputies queried Flock data during an abortion investigation that authorities initially characterized as a missing-person case.

Direct Action and Vandalism

Opposition has moved beyond public meetings. During June and July, activists across the country spray-painted, taped over, disabled, and destroyed Flock cameras in protest of automated surveillance. The Guardian identified at least 33 incidents across 23 states. Online communities have shared camera maps, tips for avoiding the devices, and methods for obstructing them. Several individuals now face criminal charges after allegedly destroying multiple cameras. U.S. News & World Report has tracked the broader backlash nationwide.

How Flock's Technology Works

Founded in 2017 and based in Atlanta, Flock Safety sells internet-connected license plate reader cameras that automatically photograph passing vehicles, read license plates, and use computer vision to identify vehicle characteristics including make, model, color, decals, roof racks, and other distinguishing features. Flock is one of several companies operating in the ALPR market, which includes providers such as Vigilant Solutions and Rekor Systems. Participating law enforcement agencies can search the resulting database during criminal investigations, receive alerts when vehicles linked to cases pass a camera, recover stolen vehicles, and locate missing persons. Flock's cloud-based platform also enables agencies to search data from cameras across jurisdictions using its network, not just their own devices — a feature that has amplified privacy concerns about the scale and reach of vehicle-tracking data.

The company states that its cameras do not use facial recognition and typically retain data for 30 days unless local laws require a different retention period. CEO Garrett Langley has said the company takes privacy concerns seriously and believes many critics reconsider their stance once they understand how the technology functions.

"Once they understand what the technology actually does, not what it might do in 50 years, not what someone thinks it could do, but what it actually does day in and day out, it takes a picture of a car. Most people go, 'This makes a lot of sense. I want my kids to be safe,'" Langley told ABC7.

Local Pushback Across the Country

The proposal from Rep. Massie follows a series of local disputes over Flock cameras across the United States.

In St. Petersburg, Florida, 77-year-old Carl Gunn has drawn attention by staging solo protests beneath Flock cameras, holding a sign that blocks their view. "This is just another thing to take our information and to spy on us," Gunn told Creative Loafing Tampa Bay. "I have a constitutional right to my privacy. I'm a law-abiding citizen, and I don't need anyone sticking their nose in my business. And if they do, I'm going to chop it off."

In Fresno, California, residents packed a community forum to urge city officials to remove Flock cameras, arguing the technology enables broad government surveillance. Police defended the system, saying it helped investigators solve homicide and shooting cases and emphasizing that it does not use facial recognition.

"We have to find a balance between safety and liberty," Fresno Police Chief Mindy Casto said, as reported by ABC30.

Law Enforcement Agencies Reconsider Deployments

Not all law enforcement agencies are continuing their use of Flock cameras. The Los Angeles Police Department suspended its partnership with Flock over concerns involving privacy, data sharing, security, and contract terms. Monroe County, Indiana, voted to end its contract a year early, despite commissioners acknowledging the cameras had helped solve serious crimes. Earlier in July, Leon County, Florida, delayed funding for additional cameras after residents questioned how the data is collected, stored, and shared.

CEO Apologizes for "Terrorists" Remark

The intense scrutiny has prompted a response from the company. Earlier this month, Langley apologized for previously describing anti-Flock activists as a "terroristic organization," telling Forbes that the comments were a mistake.

"My comments were a mistake, and I apologize," Langley said. "There are groups today that have real valid criticisms of the business, and I think what's changed for us is, as we've listened to them and heard them out, what we're trying to do is find this balance. We believe in a world where we can have safety and privacy."