A recent essay in The Atlantic titled “In Defense of Flock” discusses how Flock cameras will result in the certainty of apprehension, ignoring the concerns that come with allowing a mass surveillance system to remain undeterred throughout the country.

In a new blog post, Mike Fox , a legal fellow at the Cato Institute, details how the deployment of mass automated license plate readers (ALPRs) can be abused and violate the Fourth Amendment, writing in part:

True accountability requires holding every link in the chain responsible: the corporations manufacturing and operating the automated tools, the jurisdictions purchasing them, and the officers executing high-risk traffic stops based on unverified alerts. Financial liability not only compensates citizens whose constitutional rights have been violated, but it also creates a powerful market disincentive against deploying flawed surveillance tech. While states and municipalities can, and should, follow the lead of cities like Chandler, Arizona, by discontinuing Flock-style contracts, federal legislation is essential to ensure nationwide legal accountability when these systems inevitably fail.

Flock is merely one piece of a vastly expanding surveillance state. The company’s potential downfall should not be blamed on legislation targeting ALPRs specifically but through the firm enforcement of the Fourth Amendment itself. In a free society, companies that thrive on infringing upon constitutional rights should not be economically viable.

To speak with Mike Fox, contact Cato PR at pr@​cato.​org.