ACLU Calls Out Misuse of Surveillance Technology by Milwaukee Police
Introduction to the Situation
The recent criminal charges against Milwaukee Police Officer Josue Ayala have brought to light serious concerns regarding surveillance practices in law enforcement. Officer Ayala is accused of abusing Flock’s Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) system to track two women’s movements—recording their locations nearly 200 times for personal reasons. This case highlights not only individual misconduct but also raises broader questions about the ethical implications of surveillance technology utilized by police departments.
Understanding Flock’s ALPR Technology
Flock’s ALPR system is designed to scan and store license plate data from countless vehicles each day. While marketed as a tool for enhancing public safety, these devices operate without the knowledge or consent of those being monitored, and in many cases, without a warrant. This mass data collection is indiscriminate, encompassing vehicles not directly linked to any criminal activity, and allows for the tracking of individuals over extended periods. The sheer volume of data gathered raises alarms about privacy and civil liberties.
Wider Implications of Misuse
Reports indicate that the misuse of Flock technology isn’t isolated to Milwaukee. Across the country, law enforcement agencies have used similar systems for questionable purposes, including facilitating investigations for immigration enforcement. This raises concerns not just about officer conduct but about systemic issues in how such technologies are governed and regulated. As Jon McCray Jones, Policy Analyst for ACLU-WI, pointed out, this pattern of misuse is pervasive, suggesting a troubling trend where police tools designed for public safety may be used for personal vendettas.
Lack of Oversight and Transparency
A critical issue surrounding the Flock ALPR system is the lack of oversight regarding its deployment. Police officers don’t need to offer detailed justifications for their searches. Instead, they can simply categorize their use of the system under vague terms like “investigation.” In 2025, the Milwaukee Police Department recorded the term “investigation” as the justification for Flock searches over 1,000 times, raising significant concerns about accountability. This nebulous approach makes it nearly impossible for either the public or oversight bodies to assess whether the use of surveillance technology is warranted.
Call for Regulation and Accountability
The ACLU advocates for the establishment of essential transparency standards regarding surveillance technology. They suggest measures like annual public reporting about the acquisition and utilization of such technologies across Wisconsin. Moreover, informing prosecutors, defense attorneys, and judges when surveillance tools are employed in criminal cases is crucial for fairness and accountability. These measures are not just about preventing misuse; they are about fostering an environment where the public can trust that surveillance technologies are being used appropriately and ethically.
Community Control Over Police Surveillance (CCOPS)
To further ensure accountability, ACLU-WI has been vocal about the need for implementing a Community Control Over Police Surveillance (CCOPS) Ordinance in Milwaukee. This initiative aims to empower the community by requiring formal policy guidelines, ensuring that law enforcement agencies must have documented procedures detailing how and when surveillance tools can be employed. Such a framework would provide a necessary layer of protection against potential abuses.
Conclusion: A Call for Engagement and Awareness
The ongoing discourse surrounding the use of surveillance technology in policing must be infused with community engagement and awareness. Understanding the implications of technologies like Flock’s ALPR system is vital for citizens as they navigate the balance between safety and privacy, especially in light of recent events in Milwaukee. The collective responsibility to advocate for responsible oversight remains essential if we aim to protect civil liberties in the face of advancing surveillance capabilities.
For further reading, the ACLU of Wisconsin has provided critical insights on the implications of surveillance technology in their article, Surveillance Technology is Ripe for Abuse, alongside a coalition letter advocating for the CCOPS ordinance. These pieces lay the groundwork for ongoing discussions about transparency, accountability, and the ethical use of surveillance in our communities.
