Guerrilla Publishing- Ron Durbin
·
Follow
AI content
·
2 days ago
·
200 cameras. Every car in the city. No warrant. Two residents are suing to prove it's unconstitutional. If they win, 6,000 cities have a problem.
Lee Schmidt and Crystal Arrington live in Norfolk, Virginia. Every time they get behind the wheel, nearly 200 Flock Safety cameras record their license plate, the make and model of their vehicle, the direction they're traveling, and the exact time.
No judge issued a warrant. No court reviewed probable cause. The city just installed the cameras and started recording.
Their argument is simple: what the city is doing isn't crime prevention. It's a warrantless search.
The legal theory behind their case is called the "Mosaic Theory." Here's the idea:
One photograph of your car on a public road? Not a search.
But when you aggregate MILLIONS of photographs of every car in a city, 24 hours a day, for months and years, you don't have photos anymore. You have a diary. Where they live. Where they work. Who they visit. What doctor they see. What church they attend. What political rallies they go to.
The Supreme Court has already ruled that this kind of tracking violates the Fourth Amendment when it comes to cell phone location data. A federal appeals court already struck down an aerial surveillance program in Baltimore using the same theory.
The district court in Norfolk denied the city's motion to dismiss. The judge agreed: 200 cameras tracking every car in a 53-square-mile city looks a lot like a warrantless search.
The case is now before the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.
If the court rules in their favor, every Flock camera in the country, all 6,000 cities, may be operating illegally.