Federal judge calls Flock searches 'indiscriminate mass surveillance' and throws out evidence
A U.S. federal judge has ruled that a Tulsa deputy's warrantless search of Flock's nationwide license-plate database was unconstitutional, suppressing the meth evidence it produced.
An Oklahoma federal judge ruled a sheriff’s deputy’s warrantless search of Flock Safety’s licence-plate database was unconstitutional — calling the technology “a type of indiscriminate mass surveillance” — and suppressed the drug evidence it produced, TechCrunch reports.
U.S. District Judge Sara E. Hill ruled on 1 October 2026, in United States v. Kyle, that Tulsa County sheriff’s deputy Freddie Alaniz violated the Fourth Amendment when he queried Flock for Melisa Kyle’s travel history. Kyle, 46, of Crane, Missouri, faces federal drug charges.
In May, Alaniz — parked along Interstate 44 — followed Kyle’s Mazda SUV “for no apparent reason” other than its California registration, then ran her plate through Flock. The search returned more than 50 sightings spanning roughly a month, reconstructing her recent travel. After the stop, officers said they found about 91 pounds of methamphetamine in the vehicle.
Hill held the violation occurred at the database search and suppressed the Flock records and the drug evidence as “the fruit of a poisonous tree” — writing that Flock “collects information about all vehicles that pass by any network-connected camera at all times”.
The ruling is one of the first in which a federal judge has found a Flock search unconstitutional, though it is not binding precedent; Flock said it expects the decision to be appealed.
It opens a judicial front alongside the legislative one — Flip News reported yesterday that Senators Sanders and Merkley and Representative Ocasio-Cortez unveiled the Ban Flock Act, aimed at federal use of licence-plate readers.
More on this topic: all Technology stories
