Two Senators from Opposite Parties Demand DOJ Oversight After Widespread Misuse of Flock ALPRs

# What happened

# Why the senators acted Reporting and public records show dozens of cases where officers searched ALPR databases for personal reasons, including stalking or harassing romantic partners. The senators cite at least 50 officers who have been charged with or accused of unauthorized ALPR use, and note that Georgia had "at least 20" documented misuse cases. Alabama has also seen recent incidents.

# What the letter asks the DOJ The senators requested information about DOJ funding for ALPR systems, whether the department has audited state and local use, and what safeguards the DOJ requires or recommends. They requested guidance the DOJ could provide to states and local agencies to prevent misuse, and asked whether DOJ itself audits or limits its own ALPR activity.

# The current legal landscape There is no comprehensive federal law regulating ALPR use. A few states have laws, but they vary dramatically. Examples cited in reporting:

• Colorado: license-plate images may be stored for up to three years.
• New Hampshire: storage limited to three minutes unless a plate is flagged.
• Institute for Justice model legislation: would require a warrant to access images older than 24 hours.

A 2024 Congressional Research Service report noted multiple DOJ agencies (including the FBI, DEA, and U.S. Marshals Service) use ALPRs but found no publicly available, comprehensive accounting of agency practices.

# Scope of deployment Flock Safety reported it has "more than 120,000 cameras across 49 states." That scale increases the potential for both legitimate public-safety uses and abuse when access controls and audits are weak.

# Problems identified by the senators They point to weak or inconsistent access controls, inadequate auditing, insufficient supervisory review, and lack of meaningful consequences for intentional misuse. Those gaps, they say, allow officers to weaponize ALPR data against private individuals.

# Broader attention and responses Congressional hearings have examined Flock cameras and constitutional questions about tracking and privacy. Civil liberties groups and cybersecurity experts have testified in favor of either tighter oversight or outright bans. Coverage includes examples of wrongful arrests tied to ALPR data and concerns that tracking without warrants can raise Fourth Amendment issues.

# What could follow The DOJ could respond with internal audits, release guidance for recipients of federal funds, or set conditions on grants. Congressional hearings and additional oversight requests could press for federal standards or model rules. States may also revise retention and access rules in response to the publicity.

# Bottom line The bipartisan letter highlights documented, repeated misuse by officers and asks the DOJ to clarify funding, auditing, and safeguards. Absent federal rules, state variation and limited public accounting of agency use create gaps that critics say enable abuse.