WAUKESHA, Wis. — A coalition of residents and advocacy groups filed suit against Waukesha County and 11 municipalities, asking a court to require a Flock database warrant before police can search location data captured by the company’s license plate cameras.
NoCams Muskego, joined by Citizens Defending Liberty and Waukesha County resident Donavan Haidinger, argues the widespread use of Flock Safety’s cameras and cloud software amounts to unconstitutional mass surveillance that tracks people’s movements with precision. The complaint says the system logs travel to everyday destinations as well as sensitive locations, and that officers in the defendant jurisdictions can query the company’s location database without a warrant or probable cause.
Flock database warrant at center of Fourth Amendment claim
Flock Safety provides solar-powered cameras and software to law enforcement, local governments, homeowners’ associations and private users. The cameras are typically placed along roads, intersections and parking lots, recording images of vehicles and license plates that are uploaded to a searchable database the company markets as a “vehicle fingerprint,” according to the filing. Any Flock customer, including police, can run searches in multiple ways.
The plaintiffs want the court to require officers to obtain a warrant before accessing historical or ongoing location data tied to the cameras. They contend that residents have a reasonable expectation of privacy on public roads and point to U.S. Supreme Court precedent holding that obtaining location history from technology platforms constitutes a Fourth Amendment search that generally requires a warrant.
The suit names Waukesha County, the cities of Muskego, Oconomowoc, New Berlin, Waukesha, Delafield and Brookfield, and the villages of Mukwonago, Hartland, Menomonee Falls, Elm Grove and Pewaukee. The complaint states that more than 120 Flock cameras operate within these jurisdictions, including near homes, gun shops, big-box retailers and polling locations, and that department policies often lack explicit warrant requirements.
Supporters cite crime-solving, critics flag abuse and errors
Law enforcement agencies have praised the technology for helping locate missing people and suspects in violent crimes. But the lawsuit highlights instances of alleged misuse, including a former Milwaukee police officer charged with misconduct after running dozens of searches on personal acquaintances, as well as accusations that investigators attempted to mask improper lookups as training or testing.
Amid growing scrutiny, Flock’s CEO said changes are coming to the platform to mandate previously optional safeguards. Beginning Jan. 1, law enforcement customers will be required to use an audit tool designed to detect abnormal search behavior and lock out users pending review if potential abuse is flagged. The complaint argues that such controls are necessary given documented misuse.
The cameras’ accuracy has also prompted questions, drawing a congressional inquiry led by U.S. Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri. He has said he supports effective policing tools while emphasizing that Americans do not forfeit privacy when commuting to work, taking children to school or attending religious services.
In Wisconsin, opposition has led some institutions to remove the devices, including the University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee, which announced plans to discontinue their use on campus.
Advocates seek guardrails, not an outright ban
The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty represents the plaintiffs and says the goal is not to abolish Flock cameras but to ensure reasonable safeguards. The group’s president and general counsel said the lawsuit aims to preserve public safety benefits while protecting privacy through warrant requirements and other limits on access.
With statewide elections approaching, the debate over automated license plate readers and access to location databases is expected to feature prominently in Wisconsin’s political conversation.
The cameras’ accuracy has also prompted questions, drawing a congressional inquiry led by U.S. Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri.
