EFF Urges Virgina Court of Appeals to Require Search Warrants to Access ALPR Databases

"For most Americans-driving is a part of everyday life. Practically speaking, many of us drive to work, school, play, and anywhere in between. Not only do we visit places that give insights into our personal lives, but we sometimes use vehicles as a mode of displaying information about our political beliefs, socioeconomic status, and other intimate details. All of this personal activity can be tracked and identified through Automatic License Plate Reader (ALPR) data-a popular surveillance tool used by law enforcement agencies across the country."

"In Commonwealth v. Church, a police officer in Norfolk, Virginia searched license plate data without a warrant-not to prove that defendant Ronnie Church was at the scene of the crime, but merely to try to show he had a "guilty mind." The lower court, in a one-page ruling relying on Commonwealth v. Bell, held this warrantless search violated the Fourth Amendment and suppressed the ALPR evidence. We argued the appellate court should uphold this decision."

"Like the cellphone location data the Supreme Court protected in Carpenter v. United States, ALPR data threatens peoples' privacy because it is collected indiscriminately over time and can provide police with a detailed picture of a person's movements. ALPR data includes photos of license plates, vehicle make and model, any distinctive features of the vehicle, and precise time and location information."

A police officer in Norfolk searched license plate records without a warrant to infer a defendant's state of mind rather than to place the defendant at a crime scene. A lower court suppressed the ALPR evidence as a Fourth Amendment violation, relying on precedent. ALPR systems capture license-plate photos, vehicle make and model, distinguishing features, and precise time and location stamps, then upload that data to cloud databases accessible across law enforcement jurisdictions. Continuous, indiscriminate collection creates detailed movement histories and near–real-time tracking across long distances. ALPR collection parallels cellphone-location surveillance protected in Carpenter v. United States and therefore raises substantial privacy concerns and calls for warrant requirements.

Read at Electronic Frontier Foundation