SCOTUS Ruled You Have A Right to Privacy in Public
The short version: Business Reform highlights how Flock's own sales pitch—'what used to require a warrant now only requires a reason'—collides with Carpenter v. United States, the 2018 SCOTUS ruling on tracking people's movements.
Our Take
Credit to Business Reform for pulling back the curtain on Flock Safety's own sales language. When a company's marketing literally brags that it's found a workaround for the warrant requirement, that's not a bug — it's the business model. The video points to Carpenter v. United States, the 2018 Supreme Court decision holding that long-term location tracking, even using third-party records, can trigger Fourth Amendment protection. That ruling was about cell-site data, but the logic applies cleanly to a statewide network of cameras logging every plate, every time, everywhere.
Flock and departments that buy its systems like to say ALPR cameras only capture what's 'already public.' Carpenter's reasoning says that framing misses the point: it's not any single photo of your car that matters, it's the comprehensive, retrievable history of everywhere you've driven, stored and searchable without a judge ever signing off. That's the 'mosaic' the Court worried about, and it's exactly what a networked camera grid builds by design — all under the cover of a 'reason' an officer can type into a search box with zero independent oversight.
This is why we track where these cameras actually are. Check the map to see what's watching your routes, and visit take action if you want to push back at your city council or state legislature before 'reasonable suspicion' quietly replaces the warrant altogether.
This is DeFlock The USA’s original commentary. The video above is the work of Business Reform, published on YouTube — full credit to the creator.