Lawmakers in the United States have introduced several bills seeking to restrict the use of Flock Safety cameras and automated license plate readers (ALPRs). Members of Congress from both sides of the aisle have expressed opposition to Flock cameras, proposing legislation that places limitations on their deployment and use, though no bill has been introduced to completely ban these technologies as of Thursday, August 27th, 2026.

Among the proposals, Representative Tim Burchett introduced the "Protection Against Mass Surveillance Act" in July, which would prohibit federal agencies from purchasing, deploying, operating, accessing, or contracting any automated surveillance system. If enacted, this bill would effectively ban federal use of such surveillance tools. However, Mike Fox, a legal fellow with the CATO Institute’s Project on Criminal Justice, told the Daily Caller News Foundation that this bill is unlikely to pass due to anticipated opposition from federal law enforcement agencies and pressure on congressional Republicans.

Additionally, Representatives Keith Self of Texas, Eli Crane of Arizona, and Andrew Clyde of Georgia introduced the Protecting Rights in Video and Equipment Acquired Discovery (PRIVACY) Act in July. This legislation would require federal law enforcement to obtain warrants before accessing or querying data from state and local surveillance systems like ALPRs and would restrict the use of federal funds for purchasing or installing such equipment.

Supporters of Flock Safety cameras argue against outright bans, comparing such measures to banning vehicles. Langley stated, "And so when I think about legislation that calls for an outright ban, that’s like banning vehicles, and that has never made sense. Instead, what we did is we introduced laws against drunk driving, laws around seat belts, laws around airbags."

Lewbel added, "Rather than banning a critical public safety tool, Congress should consider strong, clear safeguards that ensure accountability, oversight, and responsible use are enshrined in law. We do not have to choose between protecting privacy and giving law enforcement the tools it needs to keep communities safe."

As debates continue, the proposed bills reflect a growing concern over balancing public safety with privacy rights in the context of emerging surveillance technologies.

Sources