A cross-party bill put forward on Tuesday by two lawmakers would require states to impose regulations on how police use automated license plate readers, or face reductions in federal highway funding. Representatives Raja Krishnamoorthi of Illinois and Michael Cloud of Texas, a Democrat and a Republican respectively, plan to jointly introduce legislation known as the No FLOCK Act.

The legislation would require the transportation secretary to withhold 10 percent of certain federal highway funding from any state that fails to prohibit the devices except under five limited public safety exemptions. The legislation follows moves by a number of state governors to pause funding for the technology over data privacy concerns.

Opponents argue that the technology logs continuous data on routine vehicle movements. The database allows law enforcement personnel to retrieve the movement history of any given vehicle across extended timeframes spanning weeks or months. An authority previously confined to focused inquiries may, under the current system, be applied broadly, extending to people who have not attracted any suspicion.

The company maintains a network of approximately 120,000 surveillance cameras spread across 49 states. Under the proposed law, approved applications would be restricted to toll collection, recovering stolen vehicles, locating missing or at-risk individuals, pursuing cars linked to felony warrants, and investigating vehicles connected to serious criminal offenses. Parking enforcement, traffic studies, minor misdemeanors, and certain routine criminal investigations would all be excluded from access.

Individual states would be given a two-year window to enact legislation bringing their laws into alignment. Failure to comply would result in reductions to federal allocations beginning in the 2029 fiscal year. Projected annual losses for populous states could run into the hundreds of millions of dollars.

Lawmakers have previously attached financial conditions to federal funding as a way to influence state-level policy on matters ranging from alcohol regulations to road speed limits. Krishnamoorthi told a broadcast outlet that the legislation addresses recorded instances of misconduct. In some instances, the information had been accessed by personnel to monitor former romantic partners, and law enforcement agencies reportedly transferred data to external bodies without obtaining judicial authorisation.

Devices positioned near schools and places of worship have been recorded monitoring the movements of residents and families. One official argued that the technology should not be permitted to function as an instrument of widespread population surveillance. Cloud shared that perspective, though from a different vantage point.

A $1 surcharge on insurance policies within Cloud's Texas district, which covers the Corpus Christi area, generated funding for thousands of surveillance cameras aimed at reducing catalytic converter theft. Reports from late August indicated that the Motor Vehicle Crime Prevention Authority allocated a minimum of $30 million across approximately 3,200 Flock devices. The Department of Public Safety on its own was allocated $15.9 million to fund approximately 1,200 additional positions.

Gov. Abbott directed state agencies to cut off all financial support for the equipment, and municipal authorities began terminating their agreements with the company. The Dallas Police Department informed Flock that 321 state-funded license plate readers would be taken offline. The state administration directed that units be withdrawn from public highways.

A cross-party amendment to a highway bill, introduced earlier in the year, proposed a more stringent prohibition at the national level. The legislation, co-introduced by Pennsylvania Republican Rep. Scott Perry and Illinois Democrat Rep. Jesús "Chuy" García, would have restricted use of the devices to tolling purposes alone. The measure was rejected in committee, with 44 votes against and 20 in favour.

Coverage of the outcome indicated that both sides acknowledge the problem even where their proposed remedies diverge. Publicly compiled mapping data has recorded over 137,000 automated licence plate recognition devices across the country, with the majority attributed to Flock.

Advocacy organisations have recorded instances of law enforcement personnel exploiting the information for unauthorised personal use. Allegations of unauthorized surveillance of former partners or other individuals have been lodged against a minimum of 69 law enforcement officers. Reports of property destruction have risen in number, and surveillance equipment across several states has been disabled or defaced.

The Atlanta-based company has directed over $2 million toward lobbying efforts since 2025 to protect its operations. No response to a request for comment on the proposed legislation had been received from the organisation by the time of publication. Previously, the organisation has cited robust privacy safeguards, brief default data retention periods, and its role in addressing public safety offences.

South Carolina's legislature allocated new funding to expand housing units, a move that contrasted with budget reductions adopted by several surrounding states. Law enforcement agencies in Utah backed their existing initiatives as state legislators weighed proposals for stricter oversight. Lawmakers from both Indiana and Kansas announced intentions to introduce additional oversight measures.

The No FLOCK Act seeks to establish a uniform national standard by leveraging federal funding. Tying federal highway funds to compliance offers an alternative route to nationwide regulation without requiring a direct legislative ban. Individual states retain the option to permit wider applications, though doing so would carry a monetary consequence. Legislators have a two-year window to introduce measures before enforcement takes effect.

Researchers from Congress documented several related pieces of legislation that had already been put forward during the current session. Warrants are among the legal requirements that certain parties advocate for. Certain proposed measures would prohibit government agencies from procuring these technologies. A measure under consideration would establish an accessible registry of all monitoring equipment deployed by municipal law enforcement.

Marshall County commissioners voted four to three to withdraw funding from six Flock surveillance cameras covering unincorporated parts of the county in Indiana. Authorities in Dodge County, Wisconsin, are considering comparable reductions for the 2027 fiscal year. Law enforcement personnel in Utah voiced opposition to the proposed new regulations.

Approaches to storing and managing data differ across organisations. Retention periods vary by department, with some holding data for 30 days and others maintaining it for longer durations. Flock has updated its audit logging systems following previous vulnerabilities in its security infrastructure. At its core, the system relies on a centralised database tracking vehicle locations and movements.

Those advocating for data privacy expressed support for the legislation while urging the inclusion of additional protections, among them judicial approval requirements for most data requests, scheduled data removal timelines, and oversight through independent auditing. No formal stances on the particular wording have been released by policing and law enforcement organisations.