The Electronic Frontier Foundation and the ACLU filed an amicus brief on November 9, 2026, in the Sixth Circuit court of appeals to argue that police tracking of a suspect using Automated License Plate Reader data requires a warrant.
The Case and the Brief
EFF and the ACLU filed an amicus brief in United States v. Sturdivant, a case involving robberies in and around Cleveland, Ohio. Police used surveillance camera footage to identify the robber's car make, model, and color, and then ran an open-ended search of two ALPR databases, Flock and ELSAG.
Officers discovered a car belonging to the defendant was tracked near robbery sites, leading to his arrest. The district court previously held that the defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy in his license plate number.
Arguments Against Warrantless Tracking
EFF and the ACLU argue that this tracking constitutes a search under the Fourth Amendment. According to EFF, ALPRs give law enforcement a virtual time machine to view past movements with just the click of a button.
EFF noted that a federal district court recently agreed that ALPRs are a form of indiscriminate mass surveillance that can violate the Fourth Amendment. EFF has also challenged ALPR use directly in San Jose, California and Wisconsin.
Key facts and where they come from
- EFF and the ACLU filed an amicus brief in the Sixth Circuit court of appeals in United States v. Sturdivant.
along with the ACLU, EFF filed an amicus brief in the Sixth Circuit court of appeals in United States v. Sturdivant
- Police used Flock and ELSAG ALPR databases to run an open-ended search.
running an open-ended search of two ALPR databases, Flock and ELSAG
- A federal district court recently held that ALPRs are a form of indiscriminate mass surveillance.
held that ALPRs are a “form of indiscriminate mass surveillance” that can violate the Fourth Amendment.
