Staff Reports
Representative Pat Harrigan (Republican — North Carolina’s 10th Congressional District) has introduced H.R. 10822 to rein in the spread of Flock cameras and other automated license plate readers (ALPRs). The bill is a direct response to a surveillance network that now scans billions of license plates and builds searchable histories of where Americans live, work, worship and drive. This is a conservative fight for privacy and the Fourth Amendment — not a tech witch hunt.
What H.R. 10822 actually does
H.R. 10822 would require warrants for most searches of ALPR databases, set a default 24‑hour deletion window for scans, ban searches tied to political or religious bumper stickers, and stop private vendors from selling location data or using it to train artificial intelligence. The bill also creates logging and audit requirements, a private right of action with monetary penalties, and conditions on some federal criminal justice funding for states that refuse to adopt protections. In short: it limits routine, warrantless mass surveillance while still allowing law enforcement to use ALPRs in real investigations and emergencies.
Why the bill matters — scale and abuse
Flock and other ALPR systems are huge. Reports show Flock’s network scans on the order of 20 billion plates a month and operates across more than 100,000 cameras. That’s not targeted policing — that’s a rolling log of where ordinary people go every day. We already have concrete abuse cases. A Haines City police officer, Christopher Goodson, allegedly queried an ALPR database hundreds of times to track his estranged wife. Other officers have been accused of similarly creepy uses. Even a federal judge recently found a month‑long search of a driver’s movements violated the Fourth Amendment. These are not hypotheticals.
Law enforcement is right to want tools — conservatives are right to demand limits
No one sane argues that ALPRs can never help solve crimes. Police and Flock say the cameras recover missing persons and solve cases. But useful tools can become dangerous when they collect and store everyone’s movements forever. Flock has adjusted some defaults — shorter retention and audit features — under pressure from reporting and public outrage, and Garrett Langley, the company’s CEO, has touted those changes. Still, industry promises are no substitute for the rule of law. Even President Donald Trump has said he “sort of” likes the cameras; liking a tool and letting it run unchecked are different things.
What comes next
H.R. 10822 has been referred to the Oversight and Judiciary committees, where hearings and markups will decide if the bill moves. Republicans who care about liberty should support smart, 702‑style guardrails that protect citizens without tying police hands in real emergencies. Congress should demand testimony from Flock, local law enforcement, and Representative Harrigan’s office. If you value privacy and practical public safety, this is the moment to pay attention — and to insist that technology not outrun the Constitution.
