Tracking Dissent: Surveillance of Protests and Activism

Analysis of over 12 million searches logged by more than 3,900 law enforcement agencies between December 2024 and October 2025 revealed a disturbing pattern: consistent monitoring of political demonstrations. The 50501 protests, Hands Off demonstrations, and No Kings rallies were all subject to extensive surveillance. Nineteen agencies alone conducted numerous searches specifically related to No Kings protests, sometimes using ambiguous terminology to obscure the targeting of constitutionally protected speech. But the surveillance didn’t stop at large-scale events.

The reach of Flock Safety’s network extended to individual activists. Three agencies utilized the system to monitor members of Direct Action Everywhere, an animal rights organization employing civil disobedience to expose conditions in factory farms. The Delaware State Police, for example, queried the network nine times in March 2025 concerning Direct Action Everywhere actions, demonstrating how ALPR technology is being deployed to suppress activism challenging powerful industries. This raises a critical question: at what point does legitimate law enforcement cross the line into political intimidation?

Racial Bias Embedded in the System

A November analysis uncovered deeply troubling evidence of biased policing practices. Over 80 law enforcement agencies employed language perpetuating harmful stereotypes against Romani people when searching the Flock Safety ALPR network. Between June 2024 and October 2025, hundreds of searches utilized terms like “roma” and racial slurs, often without any connection to suspected criminal activity.

Audit logs revealed searches including phrases like “roma traveler,” “possible g*psy,” and “g*psy ruse.” The Grand Prairie Police Department in Texas searched for the slur six times while utilizing Flock’s “Convoy” feature, effectively targeting an entire traveling community without any specific cause. According to a 2020 Harvard University survey, four out of ten Romani Americans report experiencing racial profiling by law enforcement. This report highlights the pre-existing vulnerability of this community, a vulnerability exacerbated by technologies like Flock Safety’s ALPR network.

The Weaponization of Surveillance Against Reproductive Rights

In October, documents came to light revealing a disturbing case in Texas. Deputies queried Flock Safety’s surveillance data under the guise of a missing person investigation, but the true purpose was to investigate a self-managed abortion. A “death investigation” was initiated concerning a “non-viable fetus,” and evidence related to the woman’s abortion was logged.

A Johnson County official conducted two searches, explicitly noting “had an abortion, search for female.” The second search accessed 6,809 networks, encompassing 83,345 cameras across the country. This incident underscores the inherent danger of Flock Safety’s system: a single query can access a vast network of cameras with minimal oversight, creating a significant potential for abuse, particularly against individuals seeking reproductive healthcare. The implications for bodily autonomy and privacy are profound.

Feature Updates: A Band-Aid on a Fundamental Problem

In June, concerns were raised that Flock Safety’s announced feature updates – including geofencing and retention limits – were insufficient to address the core issues. While these changes were presented as privacy enhancements, they fail to address the fundamental problem: the company’s business model relies on building a nationwide, interconnected surveillance network. As our investigations proved, abuses stem from the architecture of the system itself, not merely from how individual agencies utilize the technology. EFF’s analysis details why these updates are ultimately inadequate.

Accountability and Resistance Gain Momentum

The revelations surrounding Flock Safety sparked significant accountability measures. U.S. Representatives Raja Krishnamoorthi and Robert Garcia launched a formal investigation into the company’s role in enabling invasive surveillance practices. This investigation focuses on the threats to privacy, safety, and civil liberties posed by the network.

Illinois Secretary of State Alexi Giannoulias initiated an audit after research revealed that Flock Safety allowed U.S. Customs and Border Protection access to Illinois data in violation of state privacy laws. Furthermore, the EFF, in partnership with the ACLU of Northern California, filed a lawsuit against San Jose and its police department, challenging warrantless searches of millions of ALPR records. Between June 5, 2024, and June 17, 2025, San Jose police and other California law enforcement agencies searched the city’s database a staggering 3,965,519 times. The complaint details the extent of this surveillance.

Community resistance is also growing. Cities like Austin, Evanston, and Eugene have successfully canceled or refused to renew their contracts with Flock Safety, fueled by research documenting discriminatory policing, immigration enforcement, threats to reproductive rights, and the chilling effect on protest. These victories demonstrate the power of informed communities to challenge and reject surveillance infrastructure that threatens civil liberties.

The Expansion into Audio Surveillance: A Dangerous New Frontier

In October 2025, Flock Safety announced plans to expand its gunshot detection microphones to listen for “human distress,” including screaming. This expansion transforms audio sensors into powerful surveillance tools capable of monitoring human voices in public spaces. The deployment of high-powered microphones raises serious questions about wiretapping laws, the potential for false alerts, and the risk of dangerous police responses to non-emergencies. Following exposure by digital rights advocates, Flock Safety quietly amended its marketing materials, replacing explicit references to “screaming” with vaguer language about “distress” detection, while continuing to develop and deploy the technology. More information on this expansion can be found in EFF’s reporting.

Frequently Asked Questions About Flock Safety and ALPR Technology

• What is an Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR)?

  An ALPR is a technology that automatically captures and records license plate numbers, along with associated data like date, time, and location. This data is then stored in a searchable database.

• How does Flock Safety’s ALPR network differ from traditional ALPR systems?

  Flock Safety’s system is unique in its scale and interconnectedness. It creates a nationwide network of cameras, allowing law enforcement agencies to access data from across the country.

• What are the privacy concerns associated with Flock Safety’s ALPR network?

  The network’s vast reach and data storage capabilities raise concerns about mass surveillance, potential for abuse, and the chilling effect on free speech and association.

• Has Flock Safety’s system been linked to discriminatory policing practices?

  Yes, investigations have revealed that law enforcement agencies have used the system to target specific communities, including Romani people, using biased search terms.

• What is being done to address the concerns surrounding Flock Safety’s ALPR network?

  Federal and state investigations have been launched, lawsuits have been filed, and communities are organizing to challenge the use of the technology.

• Can law enforcement access data from Flock Safety cameras without a warrant?

  In many jurisdictions, law enforcement can access data without a warrant, raising concerns about warrantless surveillance and potential violations of the Fourth Amendment.