Sanders introduces bill to ban the federal government from using Flock

The Sanders bill is less about the federal government's actual ALPR footprint and more about setting a legislative marker. The federal government does use license plate readers — through agencies like the FBI, DHS, and the U.S. Marshals Service — but the overwhelming majority of Flock's ~2,000+ deployments are in local police departments and homeowners' associations. So why target the federal government? Because that's where Congress has clear jurisdiction. It's a foot-in-the-door approach: establish the principle that automated mass surveillance is not acceptable government practice, then let that principle radiate outward. The deeper story here is the quiet normalization of ALPR technology. Flock sells itself as a "crime-solving" tool, but its cameras are essentially always-on sensors that record every plate that passes — not just those of suspects. That means the government (and Flock's private database) holds a travel history of millions of innocent citizens. The Sanders bill, if it passes, would at least stop federal agencies from plugging into that data stream. But it wouldn't touch the private sector's collection or the state-level sharing agreements that already exist. What makes this politically interesting is the coalition forming. Sanders is a democratic socialist, but ALPR skepticism has historically been a bipartisan issue — the Tea Party-era right was deeply suspicious of federal surveillance, and the post-George Floyd left has pushed for police tech accountability. If this bill picks up Republican co-sponsors, it could mirror the momentum behind the Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act, which targets data brokers. The question is whether the surveillance-industrial complex — Flock has raised over $400 million and lobbies aggressively — can outspend the political optics of "the government tracking your car." The source article (https://techcrunch.com/2026/10/02/sanders-introduces-bill-to-ban-the-federal-government-from-using-flock/) notes the bill's scope extends beyond Flock to all ALPRs, which is the right call. Singling out one vendor would just push agencies to a competitor. The broader ban is the only version that makes sense — and it's the version that will face the stiffest industry pushback. Expect the counter-argument to be "this helps catch kidnappers" — which is true, but it's also true that catching kidnappers doesn't require building a permanent location database of every American. That's the trade-off the bill forces Congress to make explicit.