A fast-growing, cross-partisan coalition of lawmakers and civil-liberties groups is moving to dismantle the automated license-plate reader (ALPR) networks blanketing American roads, with Texas and Florida cutting off camera funding this summer and a new bipartisan bill aiming to choke off federal money for the systems.
Why it matters: ALPR networks like Flock Safety — now deployed by roughly 7,000 law-enforcement agencies and mapping more than 138,000 cameras nationwide — have quietly become one of the most far-reaching surveillance systems in the country, and documented misuse is turning both parties against it just ahead of the midterms.
Driving the news:
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott blocked state agencies from spending money on the cameras Aug. 27; Florida’s Department of Transportation revoked highway permits for them Aug. 31; Knox County, Tenn., voted unanimously the same day to remove its cameras, per the Daily Caller.
Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Eric Burlison (R-Mo.) — joined by Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), Lauren Boebert, Paul Gosar, Chip Roy and Victoria Spartz — introduced the “Flock-Off Act” to bar federal security grants from funding ALPRs except at borders or toll booths.
Pennsylvania lawmakers have introduced at least nine bills restricting the cameras within a matter of weeks, with Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro among those backing guardrails; California is expected to reintroduce SB 1013 next legislative session.
By the numbers:
201 — local communities that have canceled or declined to renew ALPR contracts since January 2025.
~7,000 — law-enforcement agencies using Flock-style cameras, with 138,000+ ALPR devices mapped nationwide.
46% to 38% — Americans who oppose vs. favor police ALPR use, per YouGov; Republican opposition climbed from 29% to 33% over the past year.
100+ — documented cases of ALPR misuse identified by the Institute for Justice, including officers using the systems to track ex-partners and personal rivals.
What they’re saying:
Rep. Thomas Massie: "The federal government shouldn’t provide ‘security’ grants to cities and police departments that have gone beyond the pale and turned their communities into a version of 1984."
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis: "I’m all about law enforcement having tools to hold criminals accountable... But I don’t want to have this become a surveillance state."
Sen. Josh Hawley: "Americans do not surrender their privacy rights when they drive to work, drop their kids off at school, or go to church."
The Electronic Frontier Foundation’s Rindala Alajaji: "turning our streets into a warrantless tracking grid violates fundamental civil liberties."
The other side: Law enforcement groups aren’t conceding the point. Riverside County, Calif., Sheriff Chad Bianco and the International Association of Chiefs of Police defend the cameras as one of their most effective crime-solving tools, and Flock Safety calls its systems "an important public safety tool for law enforcement... helping officers solve serious crimes" — arguing the fix is stricter use policies, not eliminating the technology.
What’s next:
The Flock-Off Act awaits action in Congress; Trump has said his administration’s position is "being studied," with an answer expected "over the next couple of weeks" — even as the White House’s own national drug-control strategy calls ALPRs "a critical technological tool," setting up a potential clash.
Pennsylvania’s slate of bipartisan bills and California’s expected SB 1013 reintroduction move through their respective state legislatures.
The bottom line: A surveillance tool that spread with little public debate is now facing bipartisan blowback from Capitol Hill to state capitals — and how the Trump administration lands on the Flock-Off Act could decide whether the pushback becomes federal law or stalls out at the state level.
Go deeper: