A Santa Clara County judge has dismissed a lawsuit challenging San José’s extensive license plate reader network, delivering a setback to groups advocating for privacy and civil liberties. Judge Jeffrey El-Hajj ruled on Friday that the city’s nearly 500 Flock automated license plate readers, which scan hundreds of millions of plates annually, do not violate individuals’ constitutional right to privacy as alleged in the lawsuit.
The judge’s ruling aligns with a 2024 state appeals court decision concerning traffic surveillance cameras in San Diego, which found no invasion of privacy. San José had argued in a January filing that the lawsuit lacked sufficient legal foundation to proceed. City Attorney Susana Alcala Wood expressed satisfaction with the outcome on Monday, stating that the court’s decision confirmed the city's use and oversight of its ALPR system complies with constitutional privacy requirements.
The lawsuit was filed in November 2025 by the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California (ACLU of Northern California) and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), representing the California chapter of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR-CA) and the Services, Immigrant Rights and Education Network (SIREN). These groups contended that the city's network of license plate readers, combined with its searchable AI-powered database that stores vehicle information for a month, constitutes a mass surveillance system described as "deeply invasive." They argued this system infringes upon residents’ privacy rights under the California Constitution and that a warrant should be required for such searches. When the lawsuit was initially filed, San José retained this information for a year.
Andrew Crocker, the surveillance litigation director for the EFF, voiced disappointment with the ruling and indicated that the plaintiffs are considering an appeal. Crocker stated on Monday that his group is exploring all options, believing that public opinion and legal trends are shifting against ALPRs across the country. He highlighted that the legal question of how large, interconnected ALPR networks, like San José’s, measure against U.S. and state constitutional rights is a complex and emerging legal question currently being debated by courts. Crocker noted that some courts, including a federal district court in Oklahoma, have reached different conclusions, determining that ALPRs violate the Fourth Amendment by infringing on the expectation of privacy against constant tracking.
This Santa Clara County court decision follows revelations that a San José police officer was terminated for misusing the city’s license plate reader network. The officer allegedly accessed the system to help a family member track a woman who had accused the family member of domestic violence. In response to this incident, Mayor Matt Mahan announced plans to ask state lawmakers to make such abuse a criminal offense. Mayor Mahan and Vice Mayor Pam Foley also proposed measures to increase audits of police searches and to tighten restrictions on database access, including prohibiting police from using personal devices for this purpose.
The city has also implemented other changes, reducing the data retention period for license plate and car information from one year to 30 days. Additionally, cameras are now barred from recording near sensitive locations such as places of worship and reproductive health clinics. However, Crocker believes these restrictions are insufficient. He commented that while cities acknowledge a problem, these measures will not solve it. Crocker argued that the very presence of ALPRs causes harm, and that the only way to eliminate the risk of abuse is to end their use entirely or, failing that, to require warrants based on probable cause for searches. He warned that further abuse of these systems is very likely. City Attorney Alcala Wood reiterated the city's aim to balance the use of this significant crime detection and community safety tool with stringent protection of individual privacy rights.
San José continues to face another similar lawsuit in federal court, where three residents are suing over Fourth Amendment privacy rights under the U.S. Constitution. These residents are seeking class-action status for all city residents whose license plates have been or will be scanned, and the city is also pursuing a dismissal in that pending case. Broader concerns about ALPRs have also emerged after media reports revealed that federal agencies, including Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, could access data from local Flock camera networks across the country. This led more than two dozen cities and counties, including Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and Los Altos Hills, to end contracts or distance themselves from Flock. In contrast, other cities like Oakland and San Francisco have affirmed their contracts, citing the technology’s investigative benefits. While Flock is the largest provider, Crocker noted that many cities use ALPRs from various vendors, and these widespread mass surveillance systems generally lead to privacy invasions, harms, and the risk of abuse.
