Privacy Activists Call on California to Remove Covert License Plate Readers
More than two dozen privacy and advocacy groups are urgently calling on California Governor Gavin Newsom to remove a network of covert license plate readers deployed across Southern California. The organizations believe this surveillance system feeds data into a controversial U.S. Border Patrol predictive domestic intelligence program, which scans roadways nationwide to identify suspicious travel patterns.
Letter Demands Investigation and Removal
In a letter sent on Tuesday, groups including the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Imperial Valley Equity and Justice requested that the administration investigate, release relevant permits, revoke them, and initiate the removal of these devices. This action follows an Associated Press investigation published in November, which revealed that the U.S. Border Patrol had hidden license plate readers in ordinary traffic safety equipment.
The data collected by these readers is fed into a predictive intelligence program monitoring millions of American drivers. This program aims to detain individuals whose travel patterns are deemed suspicious, often without their knowledge.
Concealed Surveillance Equipment
AP obtained land use permits from Arizona showing that the Border Patrol went to great lengths to conceal its surveillance equipment, camouflaging it inside orange and yellow construction barrels along highways. In California, researchers have identified a similar network, with about 40 license plate readers in San Diego and Imperial counties, both bordering Mexico. More than two dozen of these devices were hidden in construction barrels.
While ownership of every device could not be determined, permits from the California Department of Transportation indicate that both the Border Patrol and Drug Enforcement Administration applied for permission to place readers along state highways. Documents show that DEA shares its license plate reader data with Border Patrol.
Algorithmic Flagging and Legal Concerns
The letter cited AP reporting, which found that Border Patrol uses cameras to scan and record license plate information. An algorithm flags vehicles based on origin, destination, and route, with agents targeting short trips to border regions as potential indicators of drug or human smuggling. Federal agents sometimes refer suspicious drivers to local law enforcement for traffic stops, often without drivers realizing they are part of a predictive intelligence program.
Courts have generally upheld license plate reader collection on public roads but have limited warrantless access to other tracking data like GPS or cellphone location. Some scholars and civil libertarians argue that large-scale systems like plate readers might violate the Fourth Amendment's protections against unreasonable searches and seizures.
Case Examples and Scrutiny
AP identified at least two cases where California residents were caught in Border Patrol surveillance. In a 2024 incident, an agent pulled over a driver based on travel data showing a six-hour delay for a 50-mile trip from the border to Oceanside, citing it as a common smuggling tactic. In another 2023 case, agents detained a woman for a circuitous route between Los Angeles and Phoenix. Both drivers faced accusations of smuggling immigrants unlawfully.
The intelligence program, existing under administrations of both parties, has drawn scrutiny from lawmakers since AP revealed its existence last year. The California Department of Transportation and Governor Newsom's office did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Agency Responses and Constitutional Debates
CBP did not immediately comment but previously stated that plate readers help identify threats and disrupt criminal networks, with use governed by stringent policies and federal law. DEA also did not respond. Privacy organizations emphasized that the use of LPRs and predictive algorithms represents sweeping surveillance that raises constitutional concerns, as courts increasingly recognize potential Fourth Amendment violations.
This ongoing debate highlights the tension between national security efforts and individual privacy rights, with activists pushing for greater transparency and accountability in surveillance practices.
