Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Surveillance Alpr topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate committee deadlocks on bill to regulate and expand license‑plate readers
Summary
Delegate Doug Herring told the committee House Bill 27 24 would create statewide limits on automated license‑plate readers while law‑enforcement witnesses said the devices help find missing people and solve violent crimes; civil‑liberties groups warned the measure would authorize near‑mass surveillance. The committee voted 6–9 and the motion to report the bill failed.
Delegate Doug Herring, the House patron, told the Senate Courts of Justice Committee that House Bill 27 24 would set uniform limits on use, retention and sharing of automated license plate reader (ALPR) data and require permitting for placement on state rights‑of‑way. "This bill strikes a balance between protecting people, the public safety, and recognizing concerns for individual liberty and privacy," Herring said.
The bill would require agencies to obtain a permit from the Virginia Department of Transportation before installing an ALPR system on a state right‑of‑way, limit routine data retention to 30 days (later amended to 7 days in committee), require public policies and annual reporting on system use, and bar sharing data with federal, private or out‑of‑state databases except by court order or subpoena. It also would require audit trails and verification before law‑enforcement stops based on ALPR matches.
Supporters, including the Virginia Sheriffs' Association and local law‑enforcement witnesses, described multiple cases in which ALPRs aided investigations and found missing or exploited people, stolen vehicles and shooting suspects. Sheriff John Jones, representing the Virginia Sheriffs' Association, said deputies used ALPR matches to recover firearms and arrest suspects after a drive‑by shooting; Lieutenant Josh Marsh said ALPRs helped solve multiple homicides and other violent crimes in his rural jurisdiction.
Opponents, including the Institute for Justice, the ACLU of Virginia and immigrant‑rights and civil‑liberties organizations, said the bill would enable mass, persistent tracking of motorists by authorizing ALPRs along the Commonwealth's roughly 60,000 miles of public roads. Michael Swaffer of the Institute for Justice said such dragnet surveillance can reveal highly personal movement patterns and warned the measure as drafted "does too little to curb" intrusive monitoring.
Committee debate focused on four issues: the retention period for system data, access by third parties or out‑of‑state actors via subpoenas, whether permits should be limited to current ALPR locations rather than expanding to rights‑of‑way, and civil‑liberties protections and audit requirements for vendors. The committee adopted an amendment narrowing routine retention in the text from 30 days to 7 days before voting on whether to report the bill out of committee.
When the committee voted on a motion to report the bill to the floor (to refer, as discussed), the motion failed by a roll‑call vote of 6 in favor and 9 opposed; the clerk recorded the result as "bill fails to report." That means House Bill 27 24 did not advance from the committee in its current form.
Delegate Herring said he intended to continue discussing the measure in conference if there is further action on the floor.
Ending: The vote leaves the ALPR issue unresolved at the committee level; sponsors and opponents indicated they intend further work if the measure reaches later stages.
