EFF Interns Push for Warrants Before Police Access ALPR Data
EFF legal interns call for warrant requirements before police access ALPR data.
Why it matters: Enhanced privacy protections could reshape legal protocols and evidence gathering for law enforcement. Legal professionals in surveillance law should monitor these legislative efforts closely.
- EFF published a call on October 19, 2026, urging warrant requirements for police ALPR data access.
- Rep. Pat Harrigan introduced legislation mandating warrants, prohibiting political/religious targeting and requiring data deletion within 24 hours.
- The Ban Flock Act, introduced by Senators Sanders, Merkley, and Rep. Ocasio-Cortez, seeks to prohibit federal ALPR use and enforce strict data retention limits.
- Flock Safety has deployed over 120,000 ALPR cameras across 49 states as of October 2026, highlighting the scope of surveillance.
- A recent California court ruled no reasonable privacy expectation exists for ALPR data collected on public roads.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), with involvement from its legal interns, published an article on October 19, 2026, advocating for reforms to require law enforcement to obtain warrants before accessing Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) data. This move is part of a growing push to strengthen privacy protections amid expanding surveillance technology.
ALPR systems, such as those deployed by Flock Safety, have become widespread with over 120,000 cameras installed across 49 states by October 2026, collecting vast amounts of vehicle movement data. The scale of this surveillance raises concerns about tracking individuals’ activities, including where they work, their children’s schools, and places of worship.
In response, Rep. Pat Harrigan (R-N.C.) introduced a bill on October 15, 2026, that would require warrants for most ALPR database searches. The bill also prohibits searches based on political or religious messages on vehicles and mandates deletion of data within 24 hours. Harrigan stated, “When you consider that these systems track everything that you do...I think it’s pretty easy to understand why people are concerned.”
Additionally, Senators Bernie Sanders and Jeff Merkley, along with Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, introduced the Ban Flock Act earlier in October 2026. This legislation aims to ban federal agencies from acquiring or using ALPR cameras, including those from Flock Safety, allowing limited exceptions like toll collection with mandatory 48-hour data retention.
Despite these efforts, the legal landscape remains contested. On October 14, 2026, a California trial court dismissed the EFF’s case against San Jose’s warrantless ALPR data searches, ruling that individuals driving on public roads have no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding ALPR data collection.
Law enforcement officials, such as Cleveland Police Chief Dorothy Todd, have pushed back against proposals to halt ALPR use, arguing that accountability measures are preferable to discontinuation. In states like Indiana, lawmakers are also considering regulations for ALPR use following incidents of misuse.
These ongoing debates and legislative initiatives underscore a critical crossroads in balancing public safety and civil liberties, with legal professionals advised to track how these reforms evolve and impact surveillance law practices.
By the numbers:
- 120,000+ ALPR cameras deployed by Flock Safety across 49 states as of October 2026
- 24 hours — ALPR data deletion requirement under Rep. Pat Harrigan's bill
- 48 hours — maximum ALPR data retention allowed under the Ban Flock Act for exceptions
Yes, but: While legal reforms propose strict warrant requirements and data deletion, courts like in California maintain that ALPR data collection on public roads does not violate privacy expectations, complicating the legal landscape.
What's next: Legislative progress on Rep. Pat Harrigan’s bill and the Ban Flock Act will be critical to watch, along with state-level regulatory proposals in Indiana and elsewhere.