ACLU Sues ICE For License Plate Reader Contracts, Records (sfgate.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from SFGate: The American Civil Liberties Union on Wednesday sued U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement for records about the agency's use of license plate reader technology, after ICE apparently failed to turn over records following multiple requests. In December, ICE purchased access to two databases of ALPR data, the complaint reads. One of those databases is managed by Vigilant Solutions, which has contracts with more than two dozen Bay Area law enforcement agencies. "We believe the other is managed by Thomson Reuters," ACLU laywer Vasudha Talla said. The ACLU and other privacy advocates have expressed concern about how this data will be stored and used for civil immigration enforcement. The ACLU filed two requests under the Freedom of Information Act in March seeking records from ICE, including contracts, memos, associated communications, training materials and audit logs. Since then, ICE has not provided any records, the ACLU said in the complaint, which was filed Tuesday morning in the Northern District Court for the Northern District of California. "The excessive collection and storing of this data in databases -- which is then pooled and shared nationally -- results in a systemic monitoring that chills the exercise of constitutional rights to free speech and association, as well as essential tasks such as driving to work, picking children up from school, and grocery shopping," the complaint said. "We have essentially two concerns: one that is general to ALPR databases, and one that's specific to this situation with ICE," Talla said. "The ACLU has done a lot of work around surveillance technology and ALPR, and we're generally concerned about the aggregation of all this data about license plates paired with a time and location, stretching back for so many months and years."

Comments

Re: what how now

[fibonacci8]

That seems the wrong way around... Why are ICE agents allowed to connect this to an illegal alien issue when the fourth amendment still exists?

this is an ACLU fundraiser

[john of sparta]

since "privacy" in public is a moot issue

Re:this is an ACLU fundraiser

[Dare nMc]

This is about the federal government conducting surveillance, by collecting data on everyone without first having evidence of a crime.
It is unconstitutional for law enforcement people to collect this data, but not (under federal law) illegal for a private company to do it.
It seams obvious, if ICE cannot collect this data themselves, it doesn't matter how they get the data, if they maintain it; that is the same as collecting it.
They should only be able to request the minimum data directly related to a open case, and delete any un-related data to a open investigation ASAP.
ACLU should be allowed to verify this.

Re:this is an ACLU fundraiser

[Anonymous Coward]

Its not YOUR data, it is mine.

That is where Americans' and Europeans' view differ.

If the program running on my computer could belong to some megacorp and just "licensed" for my use in limited situation (such as cannot install on another machine even if I destroyed this one), if the music on a CD I bought cannot be legally played in a performance, in a store, etc, THEN why can't MY personal information cannot be only "licensed", with my consent, for YOUR limit use?

Re:this is an ACLU fundraiser

[Cytotoxic]

I don't even think the government requires a warrant for taking pictures of vehicles on public streets. Actually, I know they don't. Nobody does. There is no expectation of privacy in public.

Many states already have networks of license plate readers, both for law enforcement purposes and for things like toll enforcement. They use that data to track known criminals - like estranged parents who kidnap their own children.

If they want to place a tracker on your car, they have to get a warrant. If they want to put you under heavy surveillance, they have to get a warrant. But just checking 'who is this" by running a plate doesn't require a warrant.

What the database does is blur the lines between those last two scenarios, since checking the plates of everyone passing several points throughout a city ends up building up a database that amounts to almost the same thing as tracking an individual all the time.

It would be weird and illogical to conclude that such databases are illegal. It would also be weird and illogical to conclude that our privacy rights can suddenly be eliminated because databases, cameras and text recognition became cheap.

There's no easy and obvious answer to this one. Someone's rights are going to end up being stepped on either way.

Re:this is an ACLU fundraiser

[Dare nMc]

You're correct, collecting the data is legal I made a overly broad statement. Scanning a plate and checking for warrants in public is fine, holding that data for use exclusively used to investigate a crime with probable cause is also likely fine. ICE maintaining their own database for data mining, if that is what they are doing, is likely un-constitutional.

As common as overreach is becoming, I think it is wise for the ACLU to assume the last thing is happening. My neighbor had his pickup stolen, and reported it to the police and directly to ICE. A month later it was found in a casino parking lot because it was reported as suspicious by the security there and was recovered with the plates still attached. Turns out it had crossed into mexico and back at least 3 times through numerous ICE plate scanners, without any action. Why is ICE scanning plates, if they are not using it to catch vehicles that have a criminal history?

Re:this is an ACLU fundraiser

[sjames]

Actually, once a concerted effort is made to put together a number of casual sightings of someone in public to track a person or persons, we do have laws in place. It's called stalking, and it's very illegal.

Re:this is an ACLU fundraiser

[Cytotoxic]

Well then you are just wrong. It is that simple. If you are walking down a public street, anyone can take your picture. You haven't got a leg to stand on. If they can see it with their own eyes from a public place, you cannot expect it to be private. Not only is this patently obvious, it is settled law.

The only thing that made it even contentious was the fact that the state had decided you couldn't take pictures of their operatives in public. So police making an arrest would arrest people for videoing the encounter. And the politicians supported them. But the courts slapped them down. You have an absolute right to record things you see in public.

There was a whole movement to fix that bit of overreach by the state - a lot of which is documented over at PhotographyIsNotACrime. Quite a few people went to jail fighting to make sure that you continue to enjoy your first amendment rights to record public officials in public spaces. And even though it is now settled law, the state continues to try to violate these rights (as is well documented by the nutty "right to photograph" crowd over at PINAC.)

As for whether the state has the power to collect all this data..... well, anyone who would like to follow the 9th, 10th and 14th amendments would probably have to say no way. There's no grant of mass surveillance powers to the state in the constitution, so absent an amendment granting that power, it would seem that they lack that power. But as you clearly well understand... .that ship has sailed. The 9th and 10th are dead as doornails and the 14th is rarely used to rein in state powers these days.

Re:AI can help

[110010001000]

Yes. They will do that as soon as they teach Siri to handle followup sentences properly. But after that the sky is the limit for AI!

Re: what how now

[Darinbob]

You realize that not ever non-legal action does not have the same level of severity or the need for the same level of punishment. Entering the country illegally is a very low level crime. And despite this, people who are detained are being locked up without due process for years at a time. In the meantime the police can't be bothered to investigate property crimes that are under $1000.

Re:What does ACLU stand for again?

[drinkypoo]

They bill of rights doesn't apply to them either

Wrong.

The bill of rights is a non-exhaustive list of human rights. Granted, not all of the rights are extended to non-citizens equally, for example foreigners can only purchase a firearm if they have an immigrant visa, and can only "receive" them for sporting purposes — not for self-defense. However, some rights are theoretically extended to citizens and non-citizens alike. Historically, for example, the USA has extended the rights under the first amendment to all people.

I asked DDG "which rights in the bill of rights apply to non citizens" and the second link it gave back to me was titled "Yes, illegal aliens have constitutional rights". However, it was surrounded by similar company. You could ask Google and see if it differs.

That said, plate readers do sort of hit every single citizen, which could be an unreasonable search issue.

We know what you can do with metadata if you have enough of it. It's dangerous. But we can't possibly stop our government from collecting it any more than we can stop Google. (They, too, have cars driving around with cameras on them...) So what do we do about it? I'd like to replace license plates with transponders, because they are ugly and affect aerodynamics. That would at least stop Google from recording our plate numbers (with good enough crypto, anyway.) But what can we do about our government?

Re:The right to privacy in public?

[Comrade Ogilvy]

There is a deeper strategy here.
(1) Get information with the suit (and make a little publicity along the way)
(2) With hard facts, be able to demonstrate that this private company selling information to ICE is dependent on local law enforcement feeding data into the system
(3) Put the squeeze on local politicians about whether voters will support them helping ICE officials raid within their city

In a lot of cities in California, this strategy could easily work, cutting down these surveillance providers at the knees. They have nothing useful to sell to ICE if city police departments do not give them the license plate reader information.

Re:What does ACLU stand for again?

[drinkypoo]

For all the weeping and wailing against the border wall, I don't think the left understands something. If that wall isn't built in this decade, in the next decade what will be built is death camps.

You have that completely ass-backwards. If they build the wall, look out, because the death camps are soon to follow. Trump has already echoed hitler in too many ways to count.

At that point, the right will treat the Constitution the same way as the left does -- irrelevant ink spots on paper

Erosion of rights has been bipartisan, son. You're way out in the bushes. We're not playing there.