A lawsuit challenging San Jose’s use of automated license plate reader cameras is still alive, after a Santa Clara County judge asked both sides to submit additional briefing before he rules on the case.<\/p>\n
At the center of the dispute is a single question: Do drivers have a reasonable expectation of privacy in where their cars travel on public roads?<\/p>\n
The case marks the first major legal test of a crime-fighting tool now used in cities across the Bay Area. San Jose has nearly 500 license plate reader cameras installed throughout the city.<\/p>\n
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) filed the lawsuit, arguing San Jose violated a California law limiting how police collect, retain and share license plate data, as well as people’s constitutional privacy rights.<\/p>\n
CAIR’s Zahra Billoo said the concern isn’t a single camera snapshot, but the creation of a searchable history of where people have been.\u00a0<\/p>\n
“Police should not simply be able to follow where our cars are and where they went,” Billoo said. “It’s not just about whether or not someone has committed a crime, it’s about whether you want the government in your business.”<\/p>\n
The plaintiffs want police to be required to get a warrant before searching the camera data, comparing it to cellphone location tracking, which the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled requires a warrant.<\/p>\n
San Jose argues there’s no reasonable expectation of privacy on public roads, pointing to a California appeals court decision that allowed police to access traffic camera footage of a murder suspect without a warrant. The judge indicated he’s leaning toward the city’s position but wants more research before deciding.<\/p>\n
EFF attorney Andrew Crocker called the request for further briefing encouraging, though he acknowledged it’s “an uphill battle” since the judge signaled he was inclined to side with the city.<\/p>\n
Legal analyst Steven Clark described the hearing as a procedural win for San Jose, saying the court essentially told plaintiffs they need to allege more facts. San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan’s office said in a statement it appreciated “the Court’s careful consideration and today’s tentative ruling in the City’s favor,” adding the city remains committed to using public-safety tools responsibly.<\/p>\n
The San Jose Police Department said it has cut its data retention window from one year to 30 days, but questions remain about what the technology can reveal about people’s movements, including medical visits or gun purchases. The department declined an interview but said the cameras help solve crimes, recover stolen vehicles and find missing people.<\/p>\n
Police added, “Any sharing of ALPR data must meet defined policy requirements, be directly tied to a legitimate investigative purpose, and comply with all applicable laws and oversight requirements.”<\/p>\n
Clark said whichever way the judge rules, the case will likely be appealed to a higher court.<\/p>\n
The judge expects to issue a decision within the next few months.<\/p>\n
\n More from CBS News\n <\/p>\n