Candidates nationwide target AI-powered Flock surveillance cameras
Select a version of the text written from a presumed ideological perspective. This is not the original text, but a hypothetical version — how someone with that viewpoint might have phrased it. Tapping the current version again will return to the original or select cleaned version.
Political candidates from both parties are making Flock Safety's automated license-plate cameras a campaign issue, with some calling for bans or stricter oversight while law-enforcement groups defend the technology.
The AI-driven network of automated license-plate cameras sold by Atlanta-based Flock Safety has become a focal point in races across the United States. The devices, which record vehicle data and allow law-enforcement agencies to search and share that information, are installed in an estimated 6,000 communities nationwide.
In Wisconsin, Democratic gubernatorial nominee David Crowley said he would enact transparency and accountability measures after limiting the cameras in Milwaukee County, while Republican opponent Tom Tiffany pledged to pause state funding and create a task force on privacy protections. Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro announced support for a statewide ban, and his Republican challenger Stacy Garrity called the cameras “an intrusive invasion of privacy.”
Texas Senate candidate James Talarico declared that “Flock cameras have no place in Texas,” and Michigan House candidate William Lawrence described them as “the most un-American thing I can imagine.” In Florida, Democratic Senate nominee Angie Nixon’s campaign is selling a T-shirt urging the removal of the cameras.
Law-enforcement officials continue to back the technology. Mitchell Davis III, chief of police in Hazel Crest, Illinois, and president of the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives, called the cameras “invaluable” and warned that eliminating them would be a mistake without proper guidelines.
Flock Safety’s vice president of communications, MoMo Zhou, said the company’s system has helped solve roughly one million crimes and reunite about 10,000 missing persons, urging policymakers to consider the safeguards already in place.
Legal challenges and privacy concerns have risen as activists highlight potential warrantless mass surveillance and instances of misuse. Michael Soyfer, an attorney with the Institute for Justice, praised activists for prompting bans, funding cuts, or warrant requirements.
The debate reflects broader national discussions about artificial-intelligence technologies, data-center expansion, and the balance between public safety and civil liberties.