Are Flock Cameras Legal in North Carolina?
Short answer: yes — automated license-plate readers are legal in North Carolina. But “legal” is not the same as “unregulated,” “constitutional,” or “adopted the right way.”
The short answer
Yes. Automated license-plate readers (ALPRs) — the technology behind Flock’s plate cameras — are legal in North Carolina. But North Carolina is one of the few states that regulates them by statute, in Article 3D of Chapter 20 (G.S. 20-183.30 through .33). Here, “legal” means “permitted within strict limits” — not “anything goes.”
What the law actually requires
- Law-enforcement use only. Captured data may be accessed only by a criminal-justice agency, for a legitimate law-enforcement purpose, under a written request (§ 20-183.31(b)).
- No traffic enforcement. The statute bars using ALPRs to enforce traffic laws.
- A 90-day retention cap. Captured plate data must generally be deleted within 90 days unless it is part of an ongoing investigation (§ 20-183.32).
- Confidential, and not for sale. The data is confidential, is not a public record, and “shall not be sold for any purpose” (§ 20-183.32). (More on that: can police sell plate data?)
- Misuse is a crime. Accessing the system for a non-law-enforcement purpose is punishable — the charge North Carolina has already brought against officers in Charlotte and Mooresville.
Two big questions “it’s legal” skips
1. The live-video cameras may sit outside the ALPR law entirely. New Hanover runs eight Flock “Condor” live-video cameras. North Carolina defines an ALPR narrowly — a system that converts plate images into computer-readable data. A live-video camera converts nothing, so a Condor feed arguably falls outside Article 3D’s retention cap, purpose limit, and audit rules. “Legal” for the plate readers doesn’t answer the question for the video cameras.
2. Legal is not the same as constitutional — or as lawfully adopted. Whether a standing, searchable record of everyone’s movements survives the Fourth Amendment is an open question the courts are actively working through. The Supreme Court’s Chatrie decision held that tracking a person’s location is a search; the leading ALPR case, Schmidt v. Norfolk, is now on appeal in the Fourth Circuit — the court whose rulings bind North Carolina; and a federal court just struck down dragnet “tower dump” searches as unconstitutional. The strongest version of the “you were in public” defense — and the cases that answer it — is laid out here, and our resource for attorneys collects the caselaw on both sides. And a program can be perfectly lawful and still have been deployed with no public vote or debate — the question New Hanover faces on August 17.
So: legal, yes. Unlimited, no. Settled, not even close.
Sources
- N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 20-183.30 to 20-183.33 (Article 3D, ALPR systems) — NC General Assembly
- On the site: can police sell plate data? · the Norfolk ALPR lawsuit · the tower-dump ruling · “you were in public” — answered · for attorneys: the caselaw · how New Hanover’s program was adopted.
This page is general information about North Carolina and federal law, not legal advice, and creates no attorney-client relationship. For advice about a specific situation, consult a licensed North Carolina attorney.
You’re not a suspect. So stop being tracked like one.
It takes one minute. Add your name — then tell the officials who represent you to take the cameras down.