Senator Hawley Launches Investigation Into Flock Safety’s National Surveillance Camera Network Amid Privacy Concerns

Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., has opened an investigation into Flock Safety and its expanding artificial intelligence-powered camera network, questioning whether the technology has effectively created a searchable national database tracking Americans’ movements. The Missouri Republican, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism, initiated the probe Wednesday with a formal letter to Flock CEO Garrett Langley, citing the company’s deployment of more than 120,000 cameras across 49 states and its processing of over 20 billion vehicle scans monthly.

Hawley contends that Flock’s operation fundamentally departs from traditional law enforcement surveillance by consolidating data into a searchable national system rather than serving individual local investigations. In his letter, the senator stressed that Americans should not sacrifice privacy rights during routine activities such as commuting to work, school drop-offs, or attending religious services. He referenced Supreme Court precedent recognizing that comprehensive records of a person’s movements constitute a distinct category of surveillance beyond ordinary public observation.

Robert Frommer, director of the Institute for Justice’s Project on the Fourth Amendment, told Fox News Digital that the primary concern involves police accessing historical movement data without judicial approval. Frommer advocated for requiring law enforcement to obtain warrants before searching the database, though he acknowledged that genuine emergencies involving imminent danger or missing persons could justify immediate action with subsequent judicial justification.

Flock Safety spokesperson Paris Lewbel responded that the company welcomed the opportunity to address the subcommittee’s questions and detail the safeguards embedded in its platform. The Atlanta-based company markets its automated license plate reader technology to law enforcement agencies, businesses, and homeowners associations, with cameras capturing vehicle details including license plates, descriptions, locations, and timestamps.

Multiple municipalities have recently terminated contracts with Flock Safety, citing mounting privacy and data-sharing apprehensions. Pflugerville, Texas, unanimously voted Tuesday to disconnect all 28 cameras covered by its Flock agreement, with Mayor Doug Weiss stating that public safety and public trust must coexist. Police Chief Willie Richards acknowledged the technology’s investigative value while explaining that the department lost confidence in the vendor’s ability to maintain promised data and privacy standards.

Hood County, Texas, commissioners voted to sever ties with Flock, directing that the county’s three cameras be disconnected and covered pending removal. Constable John Shirley, who carried out the decision, posted on Facebook that warrantless tracking systems contradict principles of freedom and privacy. Shirley emphasized that effective policing need not require surrendering governmental oversight boundaries, though he later clarified he acted under court direction rather than independently.

Tempe, Arizona, has similarly disabled its Flock license plate reader system and will not renew its contract with the company. Despite Tempe police confirming no misuse of their own Flock cameras, city officials cited recent incidents of automated license plate reader misuse in Arizona and elsewhere as justifying the decision. The city confirmed that previously collected data will be automatically purged after 30 days unless tied to active investigations.

Rep. Keith Self, R-Texas, echoed Hawley’s concerns in a Wednesday social media post, arguing that Fourth Amendment protections cannot be compromised for profit or perceived security. Self referenced Benjamin Franklin’s warning against surrendering essential liberties for temporary safety. Frommer cautioned that constitutional safeguards must apply universally across all license plate reader providers, including Axon and Motorola, regardless of individual corporate data-control policies.