Does the Recent SCOTUS Geofence Case Threaten Flock?

- The Supreme Court recently heard arguments in *United States v. Smith*, a case about whether police need a warrant to access historical cell-phone location data collected via "geofence warrants"—a technique that asks tech companies like Google to identify every device inside a virtual boundary around a crime scene. - Flock Safety sells automated license-plate recognition (ALPR) cameras mounted on poles and road signs. Its network captures the location and movement of every passing vehicle. Police departments are Flock's main customers. - The key question: if the Court requires a warrant for geofence data (data generated by private cell carriers), does that logic apply to data from Flock's cameras (a privately owned surveillance network built specifically for police)? Legal experts are split. - This matters because Flock is already deployed in thousands of U.S. towns. A broad warrant requirement could upend how police conduct retroactive location searches—but only if courts see Flock's system as the functional equivalent of a geofence.