A class action lawsuit filed in Boulder County District Court challenges the city police department’s deployment of automated license plate reading cameras, with plaintiffs arguing the surveillance system violates constitutional protections against unreasonable searches.
The lawsuit, filed Wednesday, targets Boulder Police Chief Stephen Redfearn and Dawn Vanackeren, the city’s supervisor for Records and Information Services. The complaint centers on 31 automated license plate reader cameras currently operating throughout Boulder, a city of 108,000 residents located approximately 30 miles north of Denver.
These cameras, manufactured and operated by Flock Safety Group, capture and store photographs of vehicles passing through Boulder, recording license plates, timestamps, and GPS coordinates. The technology has expanded rapidly across the United States, with 90,000 cameras now installed in 5,000 communities across 49 states, capturing an estimated 20 billion vehicle movements monthly.
William Freeman, the named plaintiff who commutes to Boulder for work, attempted to obtain images and metadata of his own vehicle from the Boulder Police Department but was denied access. His complaint alleges this denial violates the Colorado Criminal Justice Records Act, while the collection itself constitutes an unlawful search and seizure.
According to the lawsuit, the surveillance system creates a comprehensive database that tracks residents’ movements as they travel to work, places of worship, medical appointments, schools, and protests. The data collected by these cameras extends beyond Boulder’s borders through a network-sharing arrangement that previously allowed law enforcement agencies from other jurisdictions to access Boulder’s camera footage.
Records indicate that external law enforcement agencies conducted approximately 424,000 searches of Boulder’s camera database within a single month, including 5,438 searches on January 1, 2025, alone. Prior to Boulder restricting access last summer, U.S. Border Patrol agents accessed the system more than 100 times. The complaint also notes that a Texas county with abortion access restrictions searched Boulder’s database 600 times in the months following the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision.
Boulder has since limited data sharing to 90 state law enforcement agencies, though concerns persist about the scope and oversight of this surveillance network. The plaintiffs argue that data sharing occurs without judicial oversight, warrants, or knowledge of the individuals being monitored.
Civil rights attorney Andy McNulty, representing the plaintiffs, characterized the surveillance system as creating conditions comparable to dystopian fiction. The Denver-based attorney emphasized that the cameras track ordinary citizens conducting routine daily activities, creating a permanent record accessible to law enforcement.
Flock Safety Group defended its technology in a statement, asserting that fixed license plate reader technology has been consistently upheld as constitutional by courts nationwide. The company maintains that it operates in compliance with applicable laws.
City officials confirmed they are reviewing the lawsuit but indicated they would present their arguments through official court filings rather than public statements while litigation is pending.
The case has been assigned to 20th Judicial District Judge Michael Kotlarczyk. The lawsuit represents the latest legal challenge to expanding surveillance technologies in American cities, raising questions about the balance between law enforcement capabilities and privacy rights in an era of automated data collection.
Leave a Reply