As federal immigration officials stepped up deportations, law enforcement conducted nearly 3,000 searches related to immigration enforcement on Virginia’s Flock Safety network over a recent 12-month period, according to an analysis by the Virginia Center for Investigative Journalism at WHRO.
Although Virginia police and sheriffs’ departments stated they would not use their systems for immigration enforcement, their systems’ connection to a national network allowed thousands of outside law enforcement agencies to surveil Virginians’ traffic routines and access license plate and vehicle data.
A new state law, which took effect in July, has limited the sharing and public disclosure of data, including images of license plates and vehicles, collected by traffic surveillance networks.
Brad Lehmann, an associate professor of criminal justice at Virginia Commonwealth University, said the widespread sharing of data could undermine a community’s trust in law enforcement.
“If I’m in a county where I see that erosion of trust, I stop trusting the cameras, I stop trusting the officers,” said Lehmann, a former police officer. “Even if I’m a victim or need help, I might hesitate to call the police.”
The data obtained from the Town of Bridgewater and Mecklenburg County is the first glimpse of how often the Flock network has been used to assist federal immigration agencies in Virginia. The audit logs, obtained through a public records request by VCIJ, did not include personal details such as license plate numbers or vehicle types.
The network audits show how regularly police in other states, often cooperating with federal authorities, utilized Flock data in Virginia for immigration-related purposes. Roughly 9 in 10 searches were conducted by law enforcement in other states.
Between January and July 2025, ICE arrested more than 142,000 immigrants nationwide as it ramped up immigration enforcement, according to the Deportation Data Project, a nonprofit research collective based at UC Berkeley. In Virginia, the increased enforcement led to nearly 4,300 arrests during that time.
The Flock Safety system is just one of multiple automated license plate readers (ALPR) surveillance systems in Virginia. The Flock network enables participating agencies nationwide to access the data. For example, images from Bridgewater were searched nearly 7 million times during one 12-month period.
The increased immigration enforcement and widespread sharing of traffic data have brought new scrutiny to surveillance companies.
Last month, Flock Safety acknowledged that it had been running “limited pilots” with Customs and Border Protection and Homeland Security Investigations, even though it did not have contracts with the two agencies. 404 Media reported that this pilot gave CBP direct access to the ALPR system.
New data shows immigration enforcement trends
The network audit logs from both Bridgewater and Mecklenburg County reveal that agencies that had access to the automatic license plate reader system conducted nearly 3,000 searches with the terms “ICE,” “ERO,” “immigration,” and “deportee.” The term “ERO” is a common abbreviation for “enforcement and removal operation.”
The network audits from Bridgewater and Mecklenburg County are networked to other jurisdictions in Virginia, and reveal searches conducted on Flock cameras throughout the state. Even without access to user logs from those other jurisdictions, the Bridgewater and Mecklenburg audits reveal the scope of immigration searches on the statewide Flock system.
Within Virginia, the highest number of immigration-related searches originated from the Warren County Sheriff’s Office. A spokesperson confirmed it conducted the searches because federal immigration authorities asked it to.
“We have an intel analyst that works in our criminal investigations division, and she works closely with all federal partners. Those requests would have come through them,” Captain Franklin Myrtle of the sheriff’s office said. “But that was prior to July 1. We no longer share that data.”
The Warren County Sheriff’s Office is not a so-called “287(g)” participating agency. The federal 287 (g) program allows local law enforcement to handle immigration enforcement on behalf of ICE.
Agencies outside of the 287 (g) program can still cooperate with ICE, said Chris Kaiser, policy director of the ACLU in Virginia. “This is a common misconception people have,” Kaiser said. “It doesn't mean that ICE isn't asking you for information or that you are not facilitating it.”
Kaiser does not advocate for the total eradication of automatic license plate readers, but he believes there is a need for stronger safeguards.
While he applauded Virginia’s new law that regulates the use of surveillance technology, he believes the measure, in its current state, would not address all the concerns the public has about the use of the data.
“We do not have a requirement that the police seek a warrant before accessing this data and violations of the current law are limited to criminal prosecution,” Kaiser said. “It would be a class one misdemeanor for an officer to share data they weren't supposed to, but again, that relies on local police to investigate themselves.”
Virginia’s Flock network was searched regularly for immigration offenses. Here’s who was looking.
Other agencies choose not to share
The Charlottesville Police Department was the first agency in the state to cut off federal access to its data after it learned that some Virginia jurisdictions were conducting searches for ICE.
“It was clear that some jurisdictions that have access to the system were working with ICE, and I don't think they're trying to hide it at all,” said Charlottesville Chief of Police Michael Kochis. “Once we got that information in Charlottesville, we shut our system out for everyone.”
Since then, Charlottesville has been the only known jurisdiction in Virginia whose Flock data would not be included in any statewide queries. The decision also limits the department from searching outside data.
Kochis said the department had to strike a balance between communities experiencing violent crimes, which wanted the Flock cameras, and those that did not.
The department’s approach to Flock Safety is held up by Kochis as a model for community-centered policing. Before deploying license plate readers, the department spent a year consulting with stakeholders—hosting more than 20 outreach events, including public meetings, educational forums, and listening sessions with civil liberties groups.
Shortly after VCIJ reported in July about widespread access to the surveillance data, Richmond police announced that it would cut off federal access entirely. The department cited concerns over the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) using its system to investigate immigration cases.
Lehmann said the original purposes of the ALPR systems — amber alerts, car thefts, abductions, and other criminal investigations— should not override privacy concerns.
“The greater good argument tends to outweigh the voices of those who are oppressed most, or those who stand to lose the most,” he said. “We have a democratic republic, which is designed to protect the voices of those who are oppressed. It bothers me to know that our license plate data, which probably included my license plate, was used for purposes other than what was intended in Richmond City. No, it did not harm me. But it is a problem for all.”
Reach Kunle Falayi at kunle.falayi@vcij.org and kunle.falayi@whro.org or @kingart.32 on Signal.
