NORFOLK, Va.—Today, a federal judge dealt tech company Flock Safety a major setback, denying the company’s attempt to intervene in the Institute for Justice’s (IJ) lawsuit that challenges Norfolk’s use of automated license plate reader (ALPR) cameras. Chief Judge Mark S. Davis of the Eastern District of Virginia ruled that Flock’s motion was “untimely” and that allowing the company into the case would “throw this case off the rails.”

“Flock Safety has built a nationwide business that enables government officials to track millions of motorists for weeks at a time without a warrant,” said Institute for Justice Attorney Michael Soyfer. “The court rightly rejected its eleventh-hour effort to barge into our case and use its resources to step in to defend its customer’s warrantless surveillance against our Fourth Amendment lawsuit.”

Filed in October 2024 on behalf of Norfolk residents, IJ’s suit argues that strategically blanketing Norfolk’s roads with AI-equipped ALPR cameras—and storing everyone’s location data without a warrant for weeks at a time—violates the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches.

Judge Davis’ opinion emphasizes that Flock sat on the sidelines hoping the court would dismiss the case and delayed trying to intervene until the lawsuit was well underway. He wrote:

“Flock made a conscious gamble to not show up to the platform on time;  it is not this Court’s fault that the train had already left the station by the time Flock arrived. . . . Allowing Flock to intervene at this late juncture or – perhaps junction – would throw this case off the rails. As such, Flock’s motion to intervene is DENIED.”

Municipalities across the country are starting to hit the brakes on installing Flock’s ALPR cameras because they recognize that mass surveillance of drivers’ movements is an unconstitutional dragnet.

Most recently:

• Denver, Colo.—On May 5 the City Council unanimously rejected a $666,000 extension of Denver’s Flock pilot program, citing “new community concerns” about constant surveillance.
• Eureka, Calif.—In February the Eureka City Council voted down a plan to install 21 Flock cameras after residents and council members warned that the system would infringe on privacy rights.
• Gig Harbor, Wash.—In March, the Gig Harbor city council rejected a motion that would have installed 10 Flock cameras in the Washington city.

The case now proceeds toward trial, with discovery scheduled to close this summer and a fall 2025 trial date. IJ will continue to fight for the right of every American to travel without being tracked by government surveillance.