US lawmakers from both parties introduce bills to curb federal access to Flock cameras

A group of US lawmakers spanning the political spectrum has introduced legislation that would sharply restrict federal agencies' use of Flock Safety's automatic license plate readers, with several of the proposals explicitly pointing to investigative reporting by 404 Media as the reason they are needed.

The Ban Flock Act

According to 404 Media, Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Senator Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) announced the Ban Flock Act on Friday. The bill would prohibit federal agencies from using automatic license plate readers (ALPRs), cut off federal funding to state and local governments that deploy the cameras, and give Americans the ability to sue the federal government when their rights are violated through ALPR use.

Sanders said in the announcement that Flock "is eviscerating the very notion of privacy by installing tens of thousands of cameras in communities across America without their consent," and warned against building a surveillance state in which a small group of companies profit from tracking citizens' movements. Ocasio-Cortez accused AI-powered camera networks of monetizing data about ordinary people's movements, while Merkley argued that no one should hold such unchecked surveillance power.

The sponsors' announcement also cited Flock's sharing of state-level information with federal immigration authorities, and law enforcement's use of Flock data to investigate demonstrations against ICE raids and the "No Kings" protests. Hajar Hammado, senior policy advisor at Demand Progress, called the bill the strongest model for federal legislation targeting the cameras, saying ALPR vendors have "wormed their way into communities across the nation."

A Republican counterpart

Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) put forward his own measure late last month, the Stop Flock Abuse Act. As 404 Media reports, it would require written approval for every search, force agencies to delete driver data after ten days with exceptions for active investigations, and prohibit ALPR networks from incorporating facial recognition technology. During a recent Senate hearing, Hawley pointed specifically to 404 Media's reporting when making his case.

The reporting behind the bills

The legislative push follows a run of 404 Media investigations into how Flock's camera network is actually used. In May 2025 the outlet revealed that local police officers were running Flock lookups on behalf of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. After that report, Flock made significant product changes, including cutting off cross-agency searches of cameras in Illinois, California and Virginia, and rolling out a tool that blocks impermissible searches as they happen.

The outlet also reported that California police investigated an "immigration protest" using Flock lookups, and, drawing on data from the Electronic Frontier Foundation, that officers across the country used Flock to monitor No Kings protests. A further report found that Flock itself taught police how to surveil No Kings protesters in a company webinar.

Questions for the FBI

Separately, Representatives Greg Casar and Shontel Brown have written to FBI Director Kash Patel asking how the agency plans to acquire nationwide access to ALPR data, a plan 404 Media first revealed in May, according to Semafor. Their letter also referenced 404 Media's reporting that a Texas officer used Flock to search license plate readers across the country for a woman who had self-administered an abortion.

Why it matters

The bills mark an uncommon point of cross-party agreement on digital surveillance: progressive Democrats and an independent senator propose an outright federal ban, while a conservative Republican proposes strict usage rules, all arriving at the same underlying concern from different directions. If passed, they would shift oversight of ALPR networks from vendor self-policing to statutory limits, and the Ban Flock Act's funding conditionality could ripple through state and local adoption far beyond federal agencies themselves. Flock's earlier responses to critical coverage were voluntary and narrow in scope, which is precisely the gap these lawmakers are trying to close. The legislation is still at an early stage and faces an uncertain path through Congress, but the sponsors' explicit reliance on investigative reporting illustrates how documented, specific abuses of camera data are now driving concrete policy proposals rather than remaining an abstract privacy debate.