A Missouri congressman is challenging federal spending on certain surveillance technologies, asserting that they constitute an unconstitutional practice. Congressman Eric Burlison has co-introduced the 'Flock-Off Act' with Kentucky Congressman Thomas Massie, a bill designed to prohibit the use of federal funds for license-plate reader and biometric surveillance cameras.
The proposed legislation takes a precise approach, focusing solely on federal expenditures rather than imposing a blanket ban on the surveillance technology itself. The bill specifically targets federal money from paying for covered camera systems, including their installation, ongoing operation, necessary maintenance, and any related data services.
Congressman Burlison stated his belief that federal dollars should not be allocated to this type of equipment. He argued that the decision to fund such systems should rest with the local community, ensuring that local taxpayers are aware of how their money is being used for these technologies. This distinction, Burlison emphasized, is key to his objection, which centers not on the mere existence of the cameras but on their potential for persistent tracking of individuals.
Burlison explained his view that a citizen should be able to move through their daily life without being continuously monitored by these cameras. He considers this level of persistent surveillance to be unconstitutional, a position he believes the courts will ultimately affirm. He clarified that the bill is not intended to impede local law enforcement's capacity to investigate and prevent crime. Instead, he argued that law enforcement agencies must find a balance between their investigative tools and the constitutional protections afforded to citizens.
Burlison underscored that he does not wish to remove tools essential for local law enforcement to combat crime. However, he also highlighted that law enforcement officers, like himself, have taken an oath to uphold and defend the United States Constitution. This perspective frames the bill as an effort to ensure that the use of advanced surveillance technologies aligns with constitutional principles.
Should the 'Flock-Off Act' become law, it would mandate specific actions from state and local entities that receive federal funding. Jurisdictions would be required to cease operating any covered systems that were paid for, even partially, with federal money within 180 days of the law taking effect. Additionally, these jurisdictions would need to terminate or decline to renew any agreements related to these surveillance systems that were funded through federal sources.
