The San Francisco Human Rights Commission released a ten‑month investigation on Monday finding that the San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) did not violate the city’s sanctuary ordinance when out‑of‑state agencies, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement, accessed license‑plate data collected by the department’s network of more than 400 automated license‑plate readers operated by private contractor Flock Safety.
Why the commission cleared the SFPD
The commission determined there was no sanctuary breach because the national‑search feature that allowed federal queries was activated by Flock without the police department’s knowledge. As the report states, “While the evidence does not support a finding against SFPD… the contractor allowed city resources to be utilized to arguably assist in enforcement of federal immigration law.”
Key recommendations for stronger oversight
Even though the department avoided a legal violation, the commission warned that the current setup leaves room for misuse. It issued five specific recommendations:
- Require officers to document a specific reason for each search and set clearer standards for who may access the data.
- Place direct SFPD control over Flock’s “Nationwide Lookup” feature, removing the default setting that lets the contractor enable federal access.
- Enable all camera options to improve public transparency.
- Automatically delete license‑plate records after 30 days.
- Hold regular reviews with Flock to stay informed about technology changes.
The commission also suggested the city consider alternative vendors, noting that Flock has previously misrepresented its data‑sharing practices.
Police department’s response
Chief Derrick Lew initially described the discovery of out‑of‑state queries as “shocking and disappointing.” The department disabled the national‑lookup tool and asserted that no data had been unknowingly shared after mid‑February 2025. However, in June Lew told the Police Commission that the department was still uncertain whether data had been shared through 299 additional queries between May 2025 and May 2026.
Lew pushed back against the commission’s policy recommendations, arguing that the body overstepped its authority.
Community and civil‑rights reactions
Advocates for data security criticized the recommendations as insufficient. Angela Chan, assistant chief attorney at the San Francisco Public Defenders Office, warned that Flock’s system enables federal immigration authorities to surveil residents and facilitate mass deportations, stating the contractor “cannot be trusted with our data.” The Electronic Frontier Foundation’s associate director of state affairs, Rindala Alajaji, echoed the concern, emphasizing that “people’s lives” are at stake.
Political backdrop
The issue sits at the intersection of the city’s sanctuary policy and federal immigration enforcement. While the San Francisco Democratic Party voted overwhelmingly to retain the cameras, several local candidates have called for stricter safeguards. The debate reflects broader tensions between local autonomy and federal authority, a theme that resonates across many sanctuary jurisdictions.
As the city moves forward, the commission’s recommendations aim to restore public confidence by ensuring that surveillance tools are used responsibly, with clear accountability and robust privacy protections.
Original reporting: Mission Local — read the source article.
