Link Resource Database
Links to reliable sources (news articles, research, and analysis) for informed opposition to dragnet mass
surveillance.
This database focuses on
facts and reporting rather than opinion or philosophy. The more reliable, the better. We're looking for things
that can be presented to elected officials and other decision-makers as independent, reliable sources that
they should take seriously.
Got one not listed here? Update or tagging suggestions? Email us.
From a mass surveillance company that wants to stuff this list full of propaganda? Go flock yourself!
40 Resource Links
Found
in 26 Entries
Click titles to visit the linked resource. Click tags to add/remove search filters. Subscribe to
for updates.
CA
KY
MA
OH
OK
TX
VA
WA
ACLU
Analysis
Court Ruling
FOIA
Fourth Amendment
Lawsuit
Legislation
Opacity
Overview
Video
✕ Clear All
📋 Enable selection mode
Select All
Deselect All
🔗 Driver wins $76 after ALPR led to bogus traffic stop, drug searches TX
Bexar County
Lawsuit
🔗 South Bay Judge Rules San José's Flock Cameras Don't Invade Privacy CA
San Jose
Lawsuit
🔗 Federal Judge Rules a Flock Search Was 'Indiscriminate Mass Surveillance' and Unconstitutional Fourth Amendment
More coverage (14 related entries):
🔗 Use of Flock Cameras Is Not a Fourth Amendment "Search," District Court Rules Fourth Amendment
🔗 ACLU announces win over Mass. State Police in case seeking ALPR info MA
ACLU
FOIA
🔗 Mass. State Police can't withhold locations of traffic surveillance cameras, judge rules MA
ACLU
FOIA
🔗 Flock Cameras Are Illegal (Maybe) Fourth Amendment
Overview
Video
🔗 The Supreme Court has a message for Kentucky on surveillance: Get a warrant KY
Fourth Amendment
Legislation
🔗 Judge rules against cities of Stanwood, Sedro-Woolley in Flock camera case WA
Sedro-Woolley
Stanwood
FOIA
Opacity
🔗 A Supreme Court Phone Privacy Ruling Just Gutted Flock's Best Legal Defense VA
Norfolk
Fourth Amendment
Copies at:
🔗 Privacy, Fourth Amendment concerns heat up as Flock cameras spread through Tri-State Fourth Amendment
🔗 License plate cameras may be next target after Supreme Court reins in location tracking Fourth Amendment
🔗 SCOTUS Ruling Could Be Bad News for Flock — But Won't Stop Mass Surveillance Fourth Amendment
🔗 Landmark Supreme Court Decision: What It Means for Mass Surveillance Fourth Amendment
Video
🔗 Are Flock cameras next? Supreme Court rules against police using sprawling cell phone location data Fourth Amendment
🔗 Are Flock cameras next? SCOTUS rules against sprawling location data OH
Cleveland
Fourth Amendment
Copies at:
🔗 The Supreme Court Just Lit a Fuse Under Flock's License Plate Camera Empire Fourth Amendment
Copies at:
🔗 Court rules that law enforcement's use of "geofence warrant" was a "search" Fourth Amendment
🔗 Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle v. BPD, 2 F. 4th 330 Fourth Amendment
Notes: An en banc hearing by the 4th Circuit finding that prolonged aerial surveillance requires a warrant.
🔗 COMMONWEALTH vs. JASON J. McCARTHY MA
Analysis
Fourth Amendment
Notes: Good review of mosaic theory and concerns about aggregated use. Did not find a warrant was necessary when only four cameras were used for a limited period of time, but made clear that a large enough deployment (with the example of 1,000 cameras given) would.
🔗 Carpenter v. United States Fourth Amendment
Notes: Establishes that cellular service location information constitutes a search specifically because the aggregate records are so intrusive. This implies that surveillance can constitute a search under the Fourth amendment when done on a large scale or to a certain level of intrusiveness, when it is (or was previously) allowable at a smaller scale.
🔗 United States v. Jones Notes: The Supreme Court ruled that GPS tracking individuals without a warrant violated Fourth Amendment rights.
🔗 Kyllo v. United States Fourth Amendment
Notes: The court ruled that the use of a thermal imaging camera to surveil inside a home without a warrant was unconstitutional. This case is often cited, including by the court, as establishing the precedent that technology cannot be used to bypass Fourth Amendment protections.
🔗 Katz v. United States Fourth Amendment
Notes: The Supreme Court established that a "reasonable expectation of privacy" can exist in public spaces.
🔗 Camara v. Municipal Court of the City and County of San Francisco Fourth Amendment
"The basic purpose of this Amendment, as recognized in countless decisions of this Court, is to safeguard the privacy and security of individuals against arbitrary invasions by governmental officials. The Fourth Amendment thus gives concrete expression to a right of the people which 'is basic to a free society.'"
Notes: This case has been cited in later cases (like Carpenter) to support applying the Fourth Amendment to warrantless surveillance.
🔗 United States v. Di Re Fourth Amendment
"We meet in this case, as in many, the appeal to necessity. It is said that, if such arrests and searches cannot be made, law enforcement will be more difficult and uncertain. But the forefathers, after consulting the lessons of history, designed our Constitution to place obstacles in the way of a too permeating police surveillance, which they seemed to think was a greater danger to a free people than the escape of some criminals from punishment."
Notes: This case has been cited in later cases (like Carpenter) to support applying the Fourth Amendment to warrantless surveillance.
