Class Action Takes On City’s 450+ License Plate Reading Cameras

Welcome once again to Lato's Law.

Here's Steve Lato.

I've talked about the surveillance states

that appears to be coming to us.

That is, cameras, license plate readers,

all kinds of stuff everywhere to where,

when you leave your house,

you might be being observed and recorded the entire time,

at least the way things are going.

And so interestingly, a lawsuit's been filed.

A federal-class action lawsuit about San Jose

and there are nearly 500 license plate reading cameras.

Okay?

So the Institute for Justice sent this to you

because, of course, they're involved in the lawsuit.

A group of three San Jose California residents

teamed up with the Institute for Justice

to file a federal-class action lawsuit

against the city of San Jose

over its use of hundreds of automated license plate

reader cameras.

Those are ALPR cameras.

I'm referring to those cameras or readers

from this point forward.

The three of them and their IJ attorneys

argue the city's use of 474 readers

violates the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

And of course, the Fourth is one

that talks about searches and seizures and so on.

San Jose's ALPR surveillance system

is one of the largest anywhere,

says IJ attorney, Michael Seifer,

one of the leaders of IJ's national campaign

against ALPR abuse.

Not only does the city have a staggering number of cameras,

it lets thousands of government employees

across California access all of its data without a warrant.

Those government employees search San Jose driver's data,

thousands of times every day with almost no oversight,

creating a situation that's ripe for abuse.

ALPRs are cameras that photograph every passing vehicle.

They use artificial intelligence

to convert the images into data

and upload the images and data to a database.

These cameras can identify the make, type,

and color of a car,

as well as other distinctive features like bumper stickers,

roof racks, and toolboxes.

So yes, if they wanted to, they could say,

hey, show us every single car

with a particular bumper sticker on it today

that passed by one of our cameras.

And they can pull it up.

So you can imagine how that could be misused.

Police can search for a car by entering

a full or partial license plate number

or filtering the cars with similar features

to the cars they're trying to find.

They can even type in a description of the car

or upload an image and have artificial intelligence

pull up pictures of cars that match the description

or image.

Most law enforcement agencies operate these networks

pool data with other jurisdictions,

some even opt into nationwide databases.

So that means that somebody somewhere theoretically could say,

I'd like a list of every single car out there

on the road that has this particular bumper sticker on it.

Again, seems to me that that could be abused.

San Jose first entered the pilot program

of the ALPR provider, Flock Safety in 2021

that involved placing four cameras,

four cameras at a single intersection.

So I've mentioned before that once they get their toe

in the door, then they can expand it.

So they started out with four.

How much abuse could there be with only four cameras?

Just four cameras.

Well, now it's 474 cameras.

So since that time, the number of cameras

has grown to 475.

San Jose initially held on to all of this data for 365 days,

but then it recently reduced its retention period

for 30 days, 30 days.

So one of the people who filed the lawsuit

is a privacy engineer for a tech company.

He spent time in China, Japan, and Massachusetts

before moving to Silicon Valley.

He is politically active and concerned

that cameras could be used to monitor

his first amendment protected activities,

including monitoring law enforcement around San Jose.

His familiarity with China's surveillance state

made him especially concerned about this system

when he began learning about it.

So this guy's lived in a place that had a surveillance state.

As an engineer specializing in privacy,

I know how important it is to protect people's data.

And now even just a few points of location history

can reveal profound and sensitive insights

about a person's life.

Having spent time in China, I know what authoritarian surveillance

state looks like, and I worry about the proliferation

of similar mass surveillance technologies across the US.

I want to ensure that police state tactics

do not become commonplace here.

One of the other guys is a California native

who works for a company that sells auto parts.

His father is a longtime sheriff's deputy in Riverside County.

While he certainly values law enforcement,

he finds the mass surveillance of people's movements

across San Jose, overbearing and creepy.

Creepy.

And then the third guy is a San Jose native

who drives past these cameras daily on his commute

and much like the other two.

Finds the mass surveillance unnerving.

In recent months, several local municipalities,

including Santa Clara County,

Los Altos Hills and Mountain View,

have canceled ALPR contracts over concerns about abuse.

Officers have reportedly used the system

to run searches on behalf of federal immigration agents

to surveil protesters and to even stalk their ex-partners.

And those are the kinds of things.

I remember I saw that story.

I don't think I did a video on it.

But where a police officer is accused of stalking

is I believe ex-girlfriend by using the plate readers

to find out where she was.

I wonder what she's doing tonight.

Great song.

This case is the first to challenge

the federal constitutionality of San Jose's ALPR system.

So through its plate privacy project,

which is an ongoing thing

that the Institute for Justice is working on,

they're fighting back against the unfettered growth

of police surveillance.

In October of 2024, IJ filed a federal lawsuit

against the city of Norfolk, Virginia

over its use of more than 170 plate readers.

That lawsuit is the first civil lawsuit

challenging their use to make it past the government's motion

to dismiss.

IJ has also helped activists across the country

fight against warrantless ALPR use

and has worked with lawmakers on reforms.

And so I've mentioned before,

I understand that these things can help fight crime.

So let's suppose there is a crime that's committed

and somebody gets a great description of the car

and a partial plate.

They can call that in and they can run through the system

and find out where the car went.

Yes, yes, that's great, okay?

But there is also something,

I don't know, mildly creepy,

I like the use of that word,

about having just cameras everywhere.

So when you go out in public,

your vehicle's being tracked everywhere

and not just a dumb camera sitting there,

but also using AI and really, really high tech photography

to get the license plate, make model, all that stuff,

the characteristics of the car was it's got a roof rack,

what's got any dings or dents in the body,

if it has any rust, if it's in Michigan,

and if it's got any bumper stickers.

And you might say Steve,

why do you keep returning to bumper stickers?

Bumper stickers here would be the best example

of how your free speech could become a problem

with respect to these cameras.

So let's suppose that there were,

I don't know, let's suppose they made

political bumper stickers.

Imagine a world where people would actually put their opinions

on a bumper sticker.

I understand it's hard to imagine.

And so somebody goes, I feel strongly about this,

and they get a bumper sticker that says,

I feel strongly about this.

Somebody, if they wanted to, could go,

I wanna see every single car that was on the roads

in our jurisdiction that's got one

of those bumper stickers on it.

Make me a list, every single one.

There you go, there's a list.

Why am I in that list now?

Because you've got a bumper sticker on your car,

so somebody chose to search for that bumper sticker.

Now, is that going to happen?

I don't know, but the whole point is

that we don't always have to wait for bad things to happen

to say, oh, maybe that wasn't a good idea.

Maybe we should take a look at something

before we widely implement it,

especially using our tax dollars.

And ask ourselves, okay, I understand the positives

of it, the good side of it.

What are the negatives?

What are the downsides?

What could possibly go wrong?

And I'm not saying you go and look

for the craziest examples out there.

However, the police officer tracking his ex-girlfriend.

You might say, Steve, would a cop ever do that?

Oh, funny, you should ask.

So, yes, you have to ask yourself, what could go wrong?

Okay, that's a great example right there.

So the other question I've got for you is 474 of these things.

Is there any place you can go in San Jose publicly?

We're cars not being just tracked, photographed on it,

any place?

And to me, that is, in fact, creepy, creepy.

So, federal class action has been filed.

This will be a great test case to see what will happen here.

But as of right now, there's a pending lawsuit.

The Institute for Justice is working on it

with three San Jose residents who don't like the idea

of these automated license plate readers being everywhere.

It's not just a reader, it's a camera.

It's actually photographing and storing the information.

And they say, well, we only keep it for 30 days,

but it does go to a database.

Does that database clear it every 30 days?

Or how does that work out?

And Alice, I have to mention to you as well,

that the Institute for Justice is a nonprofit organization

that exists solely off of the generosity of its supporters.

So if you like to support them, please do.

And if you don't know, if you should or not,

visit their website, ij.org.

I'll put a link to it in the description below this video.

Book market, just follow them and watch the great work they do

because without them, there'd be nobody

who'd be willing to fight these cases

because 99% of 100, you're gonna get outspent by the government.

How do you take on the government in a case like this?

So I salute the IG for doing the work

and I thank Dan King for sending this.

Federal Class Action Laws who challenges San Jose's use

of nearly 500 license plate reader cameras.

Question to your comments, put them below this talk to you later.

Bye-bye.

Thank you for watching, Lato's Law.

Nobody can predict the future.

The idea is to have a firm grasp of the present.