The PSP has today deployed police forces to monitor demonstrations for the right to housing in various towns and cities across the country – with particular focus on Lisbon and
West Des Moines, Iowa—Iowa voters may disagree on immigration, taxes, and the economy, but government surveillance is drawing opposition from across the political spectrum.
An Emerson College poll of 750 likely Iowa voters, conducted between late August and early September, found that 61 percent opposed police use of automated license plate reader (ALPR) cameras, compared with 26 percent in support.
The backlash comes as police departments across the state increasingly rely on surveillance technology supplied by private companies such as Flock Safety and Motorola Solutions. Their cameras record license plates and vehicle information, feeding searchable databases that allow law enforcement to piece together motorists' movements, including those of people suspected of no crime.
As Iowa's gubernatorial and congressional campaigns enter their final stretch, voters are increasingly pressing candidates on whether they intend to place limits on the technology. Jacqueline Thompson, an ordained elder in the Iowa Conference of the United Methodist Church and a self-described centrist Democrat, said she has been concerned about government surveillance for years.
"It's always been important to me [and] I've always thought that was a problem," she said before a campaign rally at a senior living community in Des Moines earlier this month. "So, when people started jumping on the bandwagon saying it, I was like, 'Hello, I've been here already!'"
Thompson pointed to two Democratic candidates, Nate Willems, who is running for Iowa attorney general, and Taylor Wettach, a candidate for state auditor, as having caught her attention with their emphasis on corporate oversight and access to government records.
For Thompson, the renewed attention to privacy is a welcome development in a political environment where Democrats and Republicans rarely find common ground. "It's kind of nice to hear the people come back to the middle [and discuss this]," she said.
Flock Does Not Have Enough Guardrails
Police surveillance technology has spread across Iowa faster than the rules governing its use.
A recent study identified at least 62 Iowa law enforcement agencies that had accessed other agencies' Flock databases, including departments that did not operate cameras of their own. Police departments can therefore search information collected well beyond their jurisdictions without having to install a single camera themselves. The study (led by Megan Graham, a clinical associate professor and director of the Technology Law Clinic at the University of Iowa College of Law) found significant gaps in transparency surrounding ALPRs.
The constitutional implications are already being tested in court. On October 1, a federal judge in Oklahoma ruled that a sheriff's deputy violated the Fourth Amendment by searching a motorist's location history through automated license plate reader systems operated by Flock Safety and Motorola Solutions without a warrant.
The search turned up more than 50 records of the driver's whereabouts across multiple states over a month. In the 38-page ruling, the judge ordered the resulting evidence suppressed, describing the technology as a form of "indiscriminate mass surveillance." The decision is not binding in Iowa, and legal challenges to ALPR surveillance still face an uphill battle, but it adds to the legal scrutiny of police tracking motorists without warrants.
The University of Iowa study also raised concerns about unauthorized database access, erroneous alerts, and the potential use of locally collected information for federal immigration enforcement.
Flock Safety says it has not provided U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement or Border Patrol with direct access to its systems. But the researchers found that local law enforcement agencies elsewhere in the country had conducted searches on behalf of federal authorities, effectively allowing them to obtain information without direct access.
Taxpayers are also footing the bill. Cedar Rapids reported operating 76 cameras at a combined average cost of more than $20,000 a month, according to the study.
Researchers struggled to determine the full extent of surveillance across Iowa. Some agencies refused to disclose the number or locations of their cameras, while others withheld records concerning unauthorized access or erroneous alerts, citing confidentiality.
The cameras are not limited to Iowa's largest cities. Becca Eastwood, deputy policy director at the American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa, said they have spread across large, midsize, and smaller communities, prompting a surge in opposition over the past year.
The backlash "has just exploded, like no other issue that I have seen in my time at the ACLU," Eastwood told Reason in an interview. Candidates running for state and federal offices are increasingly getting asked if they support police departments using ALPR cameras, she said.
Some local governments are already reconsidering their contracts. Indianola and Waukee suspended their Flock camera arrangements, Iowa Public Radio reported in August. Dallas County paused a planned rollout while awaiting guidance from state lawmakers. Ankeny, which operates 16 Flock cameras, is reportedly expected to reconsider a possible contract extension next year.
The backlash also cuts across the immigration debate. While concerns about federal immigration enforcement have helped draw attention to the cameras, critics argue the same surveillance infrastructure can be used against anyone, regardless of which party controls the government.
"This is a nonpartisan issue because people recognize that surveillance can be weaponized against anyone the government wants to weaponize it against," Eastwood said. "An increase in police surveillance impacts certain populations more, right now [but] nobody is immune."
Politicians Face Pressure To Cut Ties With Flock
The opposition is beginning to force Iowa's candidates to take positions on a technology that, until recently, attracted relatively little attention outside law enforcement and civil liberties circles.
Among the gubernatorial candidates, interviewed by Iowa Radio last month, Republican Zach Lahn has called for state-level regulation, arguing that the widespread collection of information about where people drive is unacceptable. Meanwhile, Democrat Rob Sand has expressed support for safeguards governing the collection and use of license plate data and said he would sign legislation if privacy concerns persisted. But he has also pointed to the cancellation of some Flock contracts as evidence that the market is responding to public concerns.
For now, neither approach offers much clarity on whether police should be required to obtain warrants before searching motorists' location histories or how far restrictions on data collection should go.
Ryan Johnson, a libertarian-leaning Republican who works as a machinist near Waterloo, said he could accept cameras in certain locations, such as downtown areas or near traffic signals. But he objects to their spread into residential neighborhoods and public spaces.
"Just having Flock cameras everywhere, [in] residential [areas], putting them at parks and pools, we don't need that," Johnson said while attending a Lahn rally earlier this month.
So far, some of the most concrete changes to ALPR practices have come from Flock itself. In August, the company announced that it would reduce its default data-retention period from 30 days to seven and require officers to enter a criminal case number or code for each search. The changes would not, however, require police to obtain a warrant before accessing the records.
Gary and Nancy Guthrie, a Democratic couple attending a Des Moines rally supporting Chris Jones for secretary of agriculture, remain skeptical of the cameras.
"I don't have a good feel for that," Nancy Guthrie said. "Personally, I'm very much against Flock cameras."
For all the attention the issue is receiving on the campaign trail, Iowa voters have yet to hear much about what legal limits candidates would actually impose on police surveillance.
France mobilizes 70,000 police and gendarmes amid fears of renewed unrest, while authorities restrict demonstrations and tighten security.
France has deployed 70,000 police officers and gendarmes ahead of nationwide demonstrations on Saturday, with authorities warning of a heightened risk of unrest after vandalism and looting damaged about 3,000 businesses the previous week.
Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu warned late Friday that the threat remained high, particularly from radical far-left groups and criminal elements operating alongside demonstrations called by trade unions, students and the Yellow Vest movement.
Interior Minister Laurent Nuñez announced a large-scale security operation to prevent further violence and looting.
“We will show no mercy to looters and troublemakers,” Nuñez declared. He has faced criticism from the left over police tactics and from the right for failing to prevent the previous week’s unrest.
Authorities have banned gatherings in numerous cities and restricted the routes of other demonstrations on security grounds, prompting criticism from trade unions and human rights organizations.
In major cities, trade union demonstrations were authorized on Saturday only in Paris, Marseille, Strasbourg, Lille, Mulhouse, Grenoble, Toulouse and Amiens.
In Paris, a last-minute change to the union march’s route sparked a dispute between police officials and organizers. Authorities cited the heightened threat following a racist attack on the outskirts of the capital the previous day as they redirected the march from Place de la Nation to Place d’Italie, keeping it away from the city center.
Several museums in the capital, including the Louvre and the Musée d’Orsay, will remain closed, as will the nearby Palace of Versailles. A nighttime curfew in the areas around Place de la République and Les Halles will also remain in force until Monday.
Banks and businesses in central Paris were boarding up shopfronts and windows late Friday and early Saturday in anticipation of possible vandalism, according to observations by Spanish news agency EFE.
Security concerns also extend to Orléans, about 130 kilometers (81 miles) south of Paris, where the far-right National Rally (RN) is holding a congress to formally launch Marine Le Pen’s presidential candidacy, roughly six months before the election.
Authorities estimated that 11,000 people took part in a counter-demonstration in Orléans on Saturday against Le Pen’s party. Organized in opposition to racism, fascism and imperialism, the march proceeded peacefully in a festive atmosphere, according to EFE.
Photo: Orleans, France (October 24, 2026)
Protesters chanted slogans including “Macron resign, Le Pen to prison” and sang the French national anthem, La Marseillaise, as well as the Spanish-language protest song “The People United Will Never Be Defeated.”
Authorities deployed about 3,000 officers in Orléans to prevent clashes between demonstrators and attendees at the RN congress. The local prefecture authorized Saturday’s march but banned a separate demonstration planned for Sunday.
The security measures reflect the authorities’ efforts to prevent further disorder while allowing some demonstrations to proceed. Restrictions on public gatherings and the deployment of thousands of officers have shaped preparations for Saturday’s rallies across France.
Oscar Belgal, a Dominican immigrant, was shot in the neck on Oct. 8 and detained at a federal prison. His lawyers had said he needed outside medical care.
Immigration agents descended upon Oscar Belgal, an undocumented Dominican immigrant, as he drove with his son along a strip of small stores in New York on Oct. 8.