Minnesota ALPR Privacy Bill Dies in Tied Committee Vote

Security camera mounted on a pole against a cloudy sky

TL;DR: Minnesota's HF 4205 (a bill that would have required warrants for out-of-state agencies to access license plate reader data) died in a 7-7 party-line committee vote on March 17. The bill was introduced after residents reported their ALPR data was allegedly used by ICE during Operation Metro Surge to identify them and locate their homes. Some Minnesota agencies logged over 15,000 license plate searches per day during the immigration enforcement surge. The tied committee vote effectively kills the bill for 2026.

What Killed the Bill

Rep. Brad Tabke's HF 4205 would have done something simple: require a warrant before Minnesota license plate reader data could be shared with federal agencies or out-of-state law enforcement.^[1]

The House Judiciary Finance and Civil Law Committee split 7-7 along party lines on March 17. In Minnesota's evenly divided legislature (67-67), that tie means the bill is dead for the session.

Tabke didn't mince words: "This is critical data that needs to be protected."

But Committee Co-Chair Rep. Peggy Scott (R-Andover) disagreed. She acknowledged privacy concerns but said this bill "wasn't the appropriate solution."^[2]

Operation Metro Surge Made This Personal

The bill didn't come from nowhere. It came from residents watching their license plates get scanned during the largest immigration enforcement operation in American history.

Operation Metro Surge began in January 2026, sending 2,000 ICE agents to the Minneapolis-St. Paul metro area.^[3] Residents reported that federal agents were allegedly using license plate data to identify people and locate their home addresses. It fits a broader pattern of ICE tracking people without a warrant.

The numbers back up those fears. According to the ACLU of Minnesota, one metro agency alone recorded more than 425,000 license plate searches over a six-week period. Across multiple agencies, searches hit 15,000 per day during January and February.^[4]

More than 300 automated license plate reader cameras operate in the Twin Cities metro area, placed by both public agencies and private companies like Flock Safety.

What the Bill Would Have Changed

HF 4205 had teeth:^[5]

48-hour retention: Data not connected to an active criminal investigation would be deleted within 48 hours, down from the current 60 days
Warrant requirement: Out-of-state agencies, including ICE, would need a judicial warrant to access Minnesota ALPR data
Centralized oversight: All data would route through the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, not scattered across local departments
Audit trails: Every access, search, and data share would be logged and documented
Private sector limits: Companies running their own cameras would need public signage and couldn't sell data without consent

John Boehler of the ACLU of Minnesota put it plainly: "Some law enforcement agencies are providing federal law enforcement with access to individuals' private data without a warrant."^[6]

Why Law Enforcement Opposed It

Jeff Potts, executive director of the Minnesota Chiefs of Police Association, testified against the bill. His arguments:^[7]

"Unfunded mandates" would create administrative costs for departments
48-hour retention would hamper investigations when crimes are reported days later
Warrant requirements would disrupt interstate task forces fighting trafficking and organized crime

These are the same arguments police make everywhere ALPR privacy legislation appears. And they usually win.

What This Means for Minnesotans

Without HF 4205, the status quo continues:

Your license plate gets scanned. The data sits in a database for 60 days.
Federal agencies can request that data without a warrant.
You never know when your plate was scanned, who accessed the data, or why.
Private companies can operate cameras with minimal oversight.

Civil liberties groups warned the current system enables "quiet accumulation of vast amounts of location data" on people who aren't suspected of anything. Mass surveillance, in other words. The same dynamic plays out nationally, where the data broker loophole lets agencies buy location data without a warrant.

Other States Are Moving

Minnesota isn't alone in this fight:

Washington: SB 6002 passed the House, creating 21-day retention limits and prohibiting ALPR use for civil immigration enforcement^[8]
Kentucky: HB 58 proposes 90-day maximum retention for license plate data
Wisconsin: Dane County is considering removing funding for Flock cameras over data-sharing concerns
Michigan: Alpena County just voted 5-2 against purchasing Flock cameras

The pushback is real. But in Minnesota, it wasn't enough.

What Happens Now

Rep. Scott said she's willing to "revisit the 2015 law authorizing automated license plate readers in future legislative work." That's code for: not this year.

Tabke signaled he's open to negotiations: a compromise that addresses "both privacy concerns and the operational realities of policing."

Meanwhile, the cameras keep scanning. The data keeps flowing. And if you drove through Minneapolis during Operation Metro Surge, your license plate is probably in a database somewhere.

What You Can Do

Contact Your State Rep

If you're in Minnesota, call your representative. Tell them you want ALPR privacy protections. Find your rep at house.mn.gov.

Check Your Local Cameras

Atlas of Surveillance (atlasofsurveillance.org) maps ALPR systems nationwide. See what's watching your neighborhood.

File Data Requests

In Minnesota, you can request your own license plate reader data under the Government Data Practices Act. Ask your local police what they have on you.

Support Civil Liberties Groups

The ACLU of Minnesota and EFF are leading the fight against mass ALPR surveillance. They need resources to keep pushing.

References

Published: March 23, 2026