Flock ALPRs Turn Local Police Cameras Into ICE Screening Tools

EFF confirms a one-click toggle in Flock Safety's admin interface compares every plate a municipal camera reads against the FBI's NCIC Immigration Violator file. Blue Island, IL and Sparks, NV have it on. Twelve more departments are using the broader NCIC hotlist. EFF has the records request template.

A surveillance camera mounted on a pole overlooking a street intersection

TL;DR: EFF confirmed on June 25, 2026 what city councils were repeatedly told wasn't happening. Flock Safety's automatic license plate reader (ALPR) admin interface contains a built-in drop-down where a local agency can subscribe to FBI NCIC (National Crime Information Center) "topics," and one of those topics is "Immigration Violator." Flock told EFF the FBI curates the file and pushes it to subscribing local agencies, and that ICE itself does not see the plate alerts once they leave the FBI. What ICE does not see is not the point. The point is that the Flock camera a city council approved to catch stolen cars is also matching plates against a list of immigration targets compiled by an agency with a documented pattern of administrative arrests. EFF named two departments that have already enabled the file: Blue Island, Illinois and Sparks, Nevada. EFF named twelve more that have the broader NCIC hotlist on but the Immigration Violator file unchecked. EFF also shipped a public records request template so residents can find out which box their own department checked [1][2].

How a Single Drop-Down Adds Your Town to the ICE Net

Flock Safety sells ALPR networks to local police as a stolen-vehicle and wanted-person tool. The cameras read plates at roadway speed, hash them, and compare the result against a set of hotlists the local agency chooses. EFF's investigation, published June 25 by EFF Investigations Director Dave Maass, names what those drop-down menus actually contain [1].

Agencies using Flock can subscribe to NCIC hotlists organized by "topic." The standard topics EFF found include "Gang or Suspected Terrorist," "Stolen Vehicle," and "Missing Person." Buried in the same menu is "Immigration Violator," the NCIC file compiled and maintained exclusively by ICE [1][2].

The NCIC operator manual is specific about who populates the file. Only ICE is authorized to enter or maintain Immigration Violator records [2]. The file covers criminal aliens deported for drug trafficking, firearms trafficking, or serious violent crimes, plus foreign-born individuals with an Immigration and Nationality Act violation on their record. ICE may also add the associated vehicle and plate if it has reasonable grounds to believe the subject may be operating that vehicle.

Flock's statement to EFF was that ICE does not directly receive the plate alerts. Per the company: "Local agencies add/remove license plates from the NCIC list. The FBI curates the NCIC list, and pushes it out to local agencies." When a local Flock camera hits, the alert goes to the subscribing municipal agency, which decides whether to call ICE [1]. The architecture is a middleman design, not a direct ICE readout, which is why the integration was easy to miss in procurement documents and transparency portals.

The point EFF made is structural. A city council that votes to buy Flock cameras for stolen-vehicle recovery is voting, without seeing the checkbox on the agenda, for a system that compares residents' plates against a federal immigration target list every time a car drives past the camera [1].

The Two Departments EFF Caught with It On

EFF filed public records requests and read transparency portals across the country. The two departments that have confirmed the Immigration Violator file toggled on are Blue Island Police Department in Illinois and Sparks Police Department in Nevada [1].

Sparks is the more telling case. The department's own transparency portal prohibits the agency from using its cameras for immigration enforcement. Sparks nonetheless has the federal Immigration Violator hotlist enabled in Flock, which is exactly the gap between stated policy and toggled settings that EFF has been tracking for a year [1][3]. The hotlist can hit, the local department can call ICE, and the formal "we don't do immigration enforcement" policy still reads true on paper.

EFF also named twelve agencies that have the broader NCIC hotlist enabled but the specific "Immigration Violator" file unchecked: Baraboo PD in Wisconsin, Boonsboro PD in Maryland, Elmira PD in New York, Franklin Township PD in New Jersey, Medford PD in Oregon, New Braunfels PD in Texas, Oro Valley PD in Arizona, Quincy PD in Massachusetts, Reno PD in Nevada, Roselle PD in Illinois, and Sterling PD in Illinois [1].

EFF named two departments that outright refused to release the records: Abington PD in Massachusetts and Akron PD in Ohio [1]. A refusal to release admin settings is itself a record, and it suggests the answer was going to be unflattering.

This is not a complete count. EFF and partner organizations have filed records requests in many more jurisdictions. The point of the June 25 piece was to publish a method other people can run, not to declare a winner.

Why "Immigration Violator" Reaches Further Than Criminal Aliens

The NCIC manual describes Immigration Violator records populated for people who have already been deported for specified crimes. EFF flagged a separate category that is actually broader: ICE may add plate data tied to administrative warrants, issued by ICE officers without judicial review [1][2].

Administrative warrants are the enforcement tool ICE has been steadily expanding. They do not require a judge's signature, do not require probable cause in the criminal-law sense, and have been used as the basis for arrests during routine traffic stops and courthouse arrests documented elsewhere on this site [4]. The warrant is the legal record ICE enters into NCIC, and the plate is the attachable artifact.

The resulting plate hits are different from a stolen-vehicle alert in a way the public is not used to thinking about. A stolen-vehicle alert is keyed to property crime. An Immigration Violator alert is keyed to an administrative finding by a single agency, ICE, that does not answer to a court for probable cause and is the same agency that will receive the call from the local department if the camera hits. The camera is, in this design, a warrant-enforcement tool that never had to clear a warrant process.

EFF also noted that the warrant stays in NCIC even if the underlying removal order is later dismissed or the case is otherwise resolved. There is no automatic removal step, so a single administrative entry can keep a plate on the list long past the point of any live enforcement interest [1].

How to Find Out What Your Department Toggled

EFF published three steps in the June 25 post, and they work even if your department is not on EFF's list [1].

  1. Check whether your agency uses Flock at all. Search for it on EFF's Atlas of Surveillance at AtlasofSurveillance.org. If your agency has a Flock Transparency Portal, EFF's Eyes on Flock index at EyesonFlock.com will have the link. Read the transparency portal for any "immigration enforcement" prohibited-use clause and any NCIC topics listed.
  2. File a public records request. EFF's template language asks for the NCIC topics selected in the Flock admin controls (a printout, screen grab, or CSV is fine). The request should run through MuckRock if your state has a usable records portal; otherwise use the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press state-by-state guide at rcfp.org for the right statute and fee structure.
  3. Respond based on what comes back. If the records show "Immigration Violator" checked, take the result to local reporters and your city council during the next contract renewal. If the request is denied, push back in writing, ask the public information officer for the reason, alert local press, and consider litigation. If the records show nothing, congratulations, your department is one of the honest ones. Tell EFF anyway, at [email protected] [1].

The records request is the whole ball game here. EFF has the template, but the requests still have to come from residents because the agency knows its own jurisdiction better than any outsider does.

What to Watch

The next three inflection points are not abstract. They are dates on calendars that will move this story forward [1][5].

  • Records request responses. EFF has shown that Abington, Akron, Blue Island, and Sparks all returned something. The next batch of requests, especially in California cities covered by the SF-ALPR class action and the SIREN v. San Jose litigation, will determine whether the two-department count holds or breaks higher.
  • Contract renewals. Several cities have Flock contracts running through 2026. EFF's playbook is to use records requests to create the public record before the renewal vote, so the city council is voting in daylight on whether the federal immigration checkbox stays flipped. Berkeley, Mountain View, and Santa Clara already canceled Flock over the broader federal-access pattern, and the same playbook is being run by Deflock volunteers in cities that have not yet voted [6].
  • Federal ALPR permits in California. The February 2026 coalition letter asking California to revoke federal ALPR permits remains unresolved. A state-level decision would force the question of which NCIC topics a federal operator can subscribe to, separate from the local toggle EFF is documenting [5][7].

Sources

  1. EFF Deeplinks, Dave Maass: "Are Your Local Police Using Flock Safety ALPRs to Scan for Immigrants?" (June 25, 2026)
  2. FBI CJIS: NCIC System Operator Manual, Immigration Violator File chapter (current edition)
  3. EFF Deeplinks: "More License Plate Reader Mission Creep" (May 26, 2026)
  4. State of Surveillance: "ICE Quieter Enforcement: 287(g) and the Surveillance Pivot to Non-Criminal Arrests"
  5. EFF Deeplinks: "Coalition Urges California to Revoke Permits for Federal License Plate Reader Surveillance" (February 10, 2026)
  6. State of Surveillance: "Berkeley Flock Vote Delayed as Mayor Opposes Surveillance" (June 2026)
  7. State of Surveillance: "Flock Safety Class Action Lawsuit California Federal Data Sharing" (2026)