Federal judge rules Norfolk's Flock network constitutional; plaintiffs appeal
A federal judge ruled that Norfolk, Virginia's 176-camera Flock ALPR network did not violate the Fourth Amendment, finding photos of plates on public roads are not an unreasonable search. The plaintiffs, whose cars were captured hundreds of times in four months, are appealing.
In a closely watched case, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia ruled that Norfolk’s network of 176 Flock automated license plate reader cameras did not violate the Fourth Amendment. Judge Mark S. Davis found that photographing license plates visible on public roadways does not constitute an unreasonable search, even when done repeatedly, and concluded the system did not capture enough images to reconstruct whole vehicle movements.
The plaintiffs — whose vehicles were captured 475 and 325 times over four months — say they will appeal. Civil-liberties groups, including the Institute for Justice and amici such as the Cato Institute, argue that persistent, dragnet plate tracking is exactly the kind of search the Fourth Amendment was meant to constrain. We present this ruling because an honest case acknowledges that the law here is unsettled and still being fought in the courts.