Federal judge rules warrantless Flock surveillance unconstitutional

A federal judge just dealt license-plate tracker Flock Safety a major blow, calling the system "indiscriminate mass surveillance."

A federal court ruled that an Oklahoma deputy violated a driver's Fourth Amendment rights by searching Flock's nationwide database without a warrant. The deputy used a California license plate as his sole reason to check her travel history before searching her car and finding 91 pounds of meth. Judge Sara Hill suppressed all the evidence, writing that passively cataloging vehicle locations on demand crosses the line into unconstitutional surveillance.

Why it matters: While the ruling isn't a binding national precedent, it creates a clear legal blueprint to challenge warrantless plate tracking. Local governments in states like Florida and Texas are already dropping the technology, and Senator Bernie Sanders just introduced a bill to ban federal agencies from using it. Facing mounting cancellations, Flock has reportedly offered voluntary buyouts to shrink its staff.

Know this: The legal pushback comes alongside growing public privacy concerns. Flock CEO Garretty Langley recently offered an apology to women who were stalked by police officers using the Flock database, calling for a "compromise" between privacy and safety.

If police need a warrant to track your phone, expect more courts to demand one before tracking your car.