Rep. Thomas Massie Introduces Flock-Off Act to Restrict Federal Funding for Surveillance Cameras

Our Take

Credit to KnowKNEWZ for laying out the mechanics of the Flock-Off Act in plain terms, because the details matter here. This isn't just a symbolic jab at one company — the bill's language is written broadly enough to hit any automated license plate reader system riding on federal dollars, plus biometric camera tech layered on top. That's the correct target. The problem was never just Flock Safety's logo on the pole; it's the federal funding pipeline that's quietly bankrolled thousands of these cameras in towns that never had a public debate about whether they wanted a permanent vehicle-tracking grid.

The carve-outs are worth watching closely. Toll cameras stay exempt, and a one-mile buffer along both borders keeps ALPR alive for trafficking and smuggling interdiction. That's a reasonable-sounding compromise, but border carve-outs have a way of becoming precedent for expansion rather than containment — DHS and CBP have already been generous with how they interpret border-adjacent authority. Flock's pushback, warning of public safety fallout if funding dries up, is the same argument the industry always makes: cut the cameras, and crime wins. It's an argument unencumbered by much independent evidence that blanket ALPR dragnets actually move the needle on solving crime, versus just accumulating everyone's movements by default.

Whatever happens to this specific bill in committee, it's a signal that the funding fight is now a real front in pushing back on mass surveillance, not just a local zoning fight. If you want to see how many of these cameras are already running near you, check our map, and if you want to push your own representatives on where the money's coming from, our take-action page has next steps.