A Santa Clara County Superior Court judge has dismissed a lawsuit challenging San Jose’s extensive network of license plate reader cameras. The ruling, issued on September 2 by Judge Jeffrey El-Hajj, upholds the city’s practice of allowing police to use data collected from its more than 500 automated license plate readers across the city.
The lawsuit had argued that the city’s use of this data by law enforcement agencies violated individual privacy rights. Plaintiffs in the case had specifically asked the court to implement a restriction, requiring law enforcement to obtain a warrant before conducting any search of the camera data. However, Judge El-Hajj rejected these arguments. In his decision, the judge referred to a 2024 ruling from California's 4th District Court of Appeals. That appeals court ruling, which concerned San Diego traffic and streetlight surveillance cameras, concluded that individuals do not hold a reasonable expectation of privacy for their movements while on public streets.
San Jose’s official website outlines the city's primary purpose for these devices, stating that it "uses parking compliance cameras to photograph, document, and file parking violations." The city further specifies that the fundamental aim of these cameras is to "better enforce certain parking regulations." According to the city, the cameras are intended to capture images and record the license plate numbers of vehicles that are violating city parking rules. The city's policies specifically prohibit certain uses of the data gathered by these parking compliance cameras.
Despite these specific prohibitions, the city's "parking camera" policies include a distinct exception that police have repeatedly utilized to investigate and solve crimes. One recent instance occurred last month when these cameras played a role in identifying a vehicle. This vehicle had been used by two men from Texas who, posing as delivery workers, allegedly committed multiple crimes in the South Bay area. The identification through the camera system led to their arrest.
The exception within the city’s policy clarifies the nature of law enforcement access. It states that "law enforcement may request access to previously stored footage." However, the policy emphasizes that law enforcement is not actively monitoring data collected by these object detection solutions as it comes in. This indicates that police can review past recordings but are not engaged in live surveillance through the system. Earlier this year, in a move to refine its data management practices, the city revised its camera data policies. This revision specifically limited the time the city can retain camera images to a maximum of 30 days.
