Fox News Latest Headlines
Conservative activist Robby Starbuck notches major legal win against Google, defamation suit to proceed
Conservative activist Robby Starbuck landed a major legal victory against Google on Friday as his defamation lawsuit will be able to move forward, according to a Delaware Superior Court ruling.
Last October, Starbuck filed a suit against Google seeking at least $15 million, alleging the company’s artificial intelligence programs defamed him by falsely portraying him as a "monster" to millions of users in the form of "AI hallucinations."
"The Court views these allegations as sufficient to support a claim for emotional distress damages at this stage in the proceedings, being sufficiently well-pled to proceed to discovery and flesh out the allegations," Judge Meghan Adams ruled in the court filing.
GOOGLE HIT WITH LAWSUIT OVER AI 'HALLUCINATIONS' LINKING CONSERVATIVE ACTIVIST TO CHILD ABUSE CLAIMS
Starbuck touted the victory towards discovery on social media.
"Was it directed to lie about me due to political bias, as their AI alleged? Was it a rogue programmer? A negligently released product? An executive demanding this? Poisoned training? A political bias operation? We don’t know the answers to those questions yet but in discovery we get to find those answers and depose the people relevant to our case," Starbuck wrote on X. "Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and it’s about to get bright in here. Discovery means we get to find out what Google knew, who knew it and why they allowed their AI products to continue spreading these horrific lies."
Starbuck later wrote, "Google is one of the most powerful companies on earth. It may even be THE most powerful. But today, on July 24th 2026, they failed to shut the courthouse doors on us. In short, David landed a shot on Goliath today. Why? Not because David is so great but because God is and the human pursuit of justice IS righteous. Today is a historic victory and now we’ll prepare to win the rest of this fight, not just for me, but for all of us."
In a statement to Fox News Digital, Starbuck marveled at the "historic decision."
"As we enter a time when AI increasingly dominates everything around us, we must ensure that it can’t hurt people. What was done to me should never happen to anyone else," Starbuck said. "We must draw a line in the sand that the AI being built can’t harm humans whether it’s via defamation or future physical harm. It’s my hope that this case can be the line in the sand. I very much look forward to discovery where we can dive deep on why and how this happened, as well as if any political bias played a role."
Google did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
AI CHATBOTS TAKE HEAT OVER LEFT-WING BIAS: ‘NO LONGER BE CONSIDERED NEUTRAL’
The lawsuit claims Google's AI platforms – Bard, Gemini and Gemma – have continued to display false statements about Starbuck since 2023, despite multiple cease-and-desist letters. The false statements included claims he had been accused of sexual assault, rape and harassment.
The suit also claims Gemini itself "stated" that its alleged falsehoods about Starbuck were shown to 2,843,917 unique users.
"The breaking point for me was when they accused me of child rape. That was where I was like, ‘We have to just go forward with the lawsuit. They're clearly not taking this seriously. It's escalating into something much more serious and crazy,’" Starbuck previously told Fox News Digital.
Starbuck said that the assassination of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk made him realize "some crazy person could believe this stuff," prompting him to set the record straight.
Fox News' Brian Flood and Taylor Penley contributed to this report.
Cause of death revealed for Big Sur hiker whose body was found naked on remote California trail
The California hiker whose remains were found in a remote Big Sur wilderness earlier this year died from complications of alcohol withdrawal, according to the Monterey County Sheriff's Office, which ruled her death natural.
Joanna Ruth Shields, 37, died of "probable alcohol withdrawal seizures due to chronic alcohol use disorder," the sheriff's office said.
Shields was found dead April 9 near Sykes Hot Springs along the Pine Ridge Trail in Los Padres National Forest. Investigators initially treated the case as suspicious because her cause of death was unknown, and hikers reported seeing a head wound and marks on her neck.
CALIFORNIA HIKER'S BODY FOUND NAKED IN BIG SUR BACKCOUNTRY
The sheriff's office said investigators found no evidence Shields was the victim of a crime.
She was found lying near a shallow creek wearing a black sports bra, with her clothing, sandals and a water bottle nearby, according to authorities.
An autopsy determined a laceration above her left eye was superficial and did not contribute to her death.
Investigators also concluded the marks on her neck were caused by postmortem insect activity and found no evidence of strangulation.
NOLAN WELLS INDEPENDENT AUTOPSY DOESN'T POINT TO FOUL PLAY, FORMER MEDICAL EXAMINER SAYS
"Investigators found no evidence during the forensic examination or throughout the investigation to indicate that Ms. Shields was the victim of a crime," the coroner's report states.
Fox News Digital previously reported that witnesses who discovered Shields' body told local media they encountered a man who identified himself as her friend and said he had found her after the pair became separated on the trail.
At the time, Monterey County Sheriff's Office Cmdr. Andres Rosas urged the public not to jump to conclusions, saying investigators were working to determine the cause of death and that everyone at the scene had cooperated.
The coroner's report also states Shields had a history of bipolar disorder and alcohol use disorder. Family members told investigators her mental health declined in the months before her death after she stopped taking prescribed psychiatric medication. Her sister also told investigators Shields had previously experienced alcohol withdrawal seizures before becoming sober.
Monterey County Sheriff-Coroner Tina Nieto said she hopes the findings provide answers for Shields' loved ones.
"Our thoughts and prayers remain with Joanna's family and loved ones," Nieto said. "We hope these findings provide them with some measure of peace and closure after several difficult months."
Fox News Digital's Robert McGreevy contributed to this report.
Simone Biles returns to hospital for procedure weeks after 'almost dying' in 'medical emergency'
Simone Biles was back in a hospital recently to undergo a "procedure" more than a month after she "almost" died.
Biles shared a selfie of herself and her husband, NFL player Jonathan Owens, on her Instagram Story, praising him for taking her to her procedure on his birthday.
Biles was sporting a hospital gown and cap with Owens by her side as the couple smiled for the photo.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE SPORTS COVERAGE ON FOXNEWS.COM
The gold-medal gymnast posted white hearts and happy-crying emojis with the picture.
Biles has not released specifics about what caused her "medical emergency" that resulted in her going to the hospital last month, but said only that it "could have ended very differently."
"This was one of, if not the scariest experience of my life, especially since Jonathan was in [Indianapolis] for practices. I've been in bed resting this week. I'll explain sooner or later, but [shoutout] to my close circle who reached out, checked in, visited & or sent flowers," she wrote at the time.
Biles' husband, Jonathan Owens, is a safety for the Indianapolis Colts. The couple has been married since 2023, though Owens' NFL career has occasionally forced them to spend time apart. Since entering the league as an undrafted free agent in 2018, he has played for five different teams.
The two met while Owens was with the Houston Texans in 2019. Biles lives in Texas, where the couple has built a massive home together. Since his time in Houston, Owens has also played for the Green Bay Packers, the Chicago Bears and now the Colts.
Fox News' Jackson Thompson contributed to this report.
Succession: Why Congress has no clear plan when lawmakers can’t serve
Rep. Tom Kean Jr. (R-N.J.) and former Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) have a lot in common.
Both have long spells of absences from Capitol Hill due to health.
Kean was out for months this winter and spring. But until he returned in June, no one knew exactly what was going on. Neither Kean nor his office or family said a word about why the congressman was AWOL.
Upon his return, Kean announced he endured a lengthy hospital stay for depression.
McConnell’s absence is similarly cryptic.
His office simply declared in June that the Kentucky Republican was hospitalized and receiving "excellent care."
Yet it took weeks to learn that McConnell was hospitalized for a fall and then pneumonia.
The dearth of information fueled conspiracy theories about whether McConnell was even alive. It prompted a letter of inquiry from Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear (D) as to the senator’s well-being.
He told SiriusXM he hadn’t "heard a thing. Not an email. Not a letter. Not a call."
But that’s not where the similarities between Kean and McConnell end.
During Kean’s absence, hardly a day went by when someone didn’t ask me about how they could potentially fill his seat. The same has gone on with McConnell for the past month-and-a-half.
There’s conjecture about whether their respective state’s governors, or even the House or Senate could declare their seats vacant since they haven’t shown up "for work." The American electorate is angry right now.
Prices are up. They’re disenchanted with politics.
At the very least, they want to know that the people they elected are on the job. And if they’re not, voters believe they’re entitled to explanations from those who serve them.
WATCH: LAWMAKERS REVEAL WHERE THEY STAND ON CONGRESSIONAL TERM LIMITS AFTER RECENT HEALTH SCARES
No one received timely clarity from either Kean or McConnell.
Which brings us to why some constituents think there should be a mechanism to remove lawmakers who are infirm or out for prolonged periods of time.
It’s not that easy.
Here are the constitutional qualifications for someone to serve in the House, according to Article I, Section 2: "No person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the age of twenty-five years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen."
The Senate mandates are similar, as dictated by Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution:
"No person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the age of thirty years, and been nine years, a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen."
Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution declares that "Each House shall be the judge of the elections, returns and qualifications of its own Members." It goes on to say that "with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member."
So, the Constitution is clear about the requirements to join the House or Senate.
It also grants both bodies the agility to decline to seat someone and even remove them from office.
But despite granting those authorities to Congress, the Constitution is silent on why the House or Senate might not seat someone. And, the Constitution is vague on reasons to expel a lawmaker.
That’s why we must rely on the standard established in Article I, Section 3 on qualifications of House and Senate members.
It says nothing about health. It says nothing about mental capacity. It says nothing about attendance or dereliction of duty.
It just determines the minimum criteria for people to serve in Congress. And if either the House or Senate decides they don’t want you here, they can either bar you at the door or kick you out.
Besides the House and Senate expelling someone, a governor must declare a seat vacant. And there’s nothing anyone can do to force someone to step aside.
The late Sen. Carter Glass (D-Va.) of Glass-Steagall fame, if you know banking law, fell ill in 1942. He was absent from the Senate for four years before dying. Glass rejected entreaties for him to resign.
The late Sen. Karl Mundt (R-S.D.) suffered a stroke in 1969 and couldn’t speak. Mundt’s wife nixed calls by Senate Republicans, demanding he resign. Mundt remained in office until early 1973, when his term expired.
Other lawmakers have missed swaths of time due to illness over the years prior to Kean and McConnell.
The late Rep. Lane Evans (D-Ill.) was absent for extended periods, suffering from Parkinson’s Disease in the 1990s and 2000s.
Former Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) suffered a stroke in 2012. He missed more than a year before returning to the Senate.
House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) missed several months after he was shot in 2017 at the GOP Congressional baseball practice.
Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) was away for a couple of months after battling depression shortly after he joined the Senate in 2023.
These are just a few instances of lawmakers missing chunks of time because of illnesses.
There is only one instance in recent history where the House or Senate took action because of someone’s bad health.
On October 31, 1980, the late Rep. Gladys Noon Spellman (D-Md.) suffered a heart attack.
Voters re-elected Spellman a few days later. But Spellman fell into a coma, and she was unable to take the oath of office when the new Congress convened in January 1981.
Regardless, the House took the extraordinary step of voting to pay her – even though she wasn’t a Member. It was obvious that the Maryland Democrat would never be well enough again to assume office. The House then voted to declare her seat vacant, compelling Maryland to hold a special election.
So, the House didn’t remove Spellman because of her being incapacitated.
She wasn’t a Member at that stage. But, under Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution, the House asserted its authority to "be the judge of the elections, returns and qualifications of its own Members."
It deemed that Spellman was not qualified.
The former President of the Maryland Senate then ran for the seat and won the special election. That’s how former House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) came to Congress.
Spellman lived until 1988, never regaining consciousness.
LINDSEY GRAHAM’S FINAL ACT REVERBERATES IN SENATE AS SISTER IS URGED TO 'KEEP PEDALING'
Just before the Senate swore-in Sen. Darline Graham (R-S.C.) last week, I received a call from someone asking if she was a "full senator." I answered in the affirmative.
Either you are or you aren’t.
You can vote. You can serve on committees. You can speak on the Senate floor. You have an office in the Capitol complex. It doesn’t matter how you got there. Darline Graham was a senator – via an appointment after the death of her late brother, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)
The Senate granted Graham the same committee assignments as her brother. That’s when someone asked if she could vote on the Judiciary Committee.
Same answer. She is a senator.
South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster (R) has appointed her to at least serve out the balance of Lindsey’s term, which expires in January.
Darline Graham is now running for the full term which begins in January. But she must first make it through a primary – and potentially a runoff – in order to secure the Republican nomination. Then win the full term in November.
Note that we talked about McMaster appointing Darline Graham to the Senate. All but four states allow the appointment of senators. However, the Constitution bars appointment to the House.
So if a House member dies or resigns, the state must fill the seat via a special election. That’s why some House seats sit vacant for protracted periods.
Lindsey Graham’s seat was vacant barely two days before McMaster tapped the late senator’s sister to step in.
This is why Republicans have such a tenuous hold on the House right now.
There are currently 431 members. The breakdown is 218 Republicans, 212 Democrats and one Independent who teams up with the GOP. Extended absences by Kean — and to a lesser degree, Rep. Neal Dunn (R-Fla.) because of a major heart condition — made it hard for the GOP majority to operate.
Resignations or deaths could really alter the balance of power.
But once someone is in a House or Senate seat, they’re in. There’s no succession plan for health.
Average Americans suggest that they would lose their jobs if they didn’t show up for work. Even with a serious health condition.
But the same thing happens in Congress. Every two or six years. People vote for the House and Senate.
Those lawmakers may in fact lose their jobs. But it might just take a very long time.
Selena Gomez posts swimsuit-filled yacht vacation photos with husband Benny Blanco
Selena Gomez got cheeky while on vacation with her husband.
In a recent Instagram post, the 34-year-old actress shared a series of photos from her recent getaway with her husband, Benny Blanco, captioning the post with a blue heart.
The photos included snaps of her husband, the delicious food they ate, Gomez petting horses and many that featured her on a yacht in a swimsuit.
One photo shows her rocking a white one-piece with a plunging neckline as she leans against the railing on the yacht, with the blue water visible behind her. She paired the swimsuit with sunglasses and gold hair clips as she looked up at the camera with her lips pursed.
SYDNEY SWEENEY SHARES BIKINI AND UNDERWEAR PHOTOS IN INSTAGRAM DUMP FROM AUSTRALIA TRIP
She is seen wearing the same one-piece later on in the carousel of photos. This time, however, she is sitting on the couch playing Scrabble with Blanco, who is sporting an all-white look and flashing the camera peace sign as he concentrates on the game.
In another photo, the "Only Murders in the Building" star is giving the camera a sultry look as she poses with her arms up in a blue bikini. She's wearing the same bikini in a different photo, but this time posing with her back to the camera.
"Happiness looks SO good on you. You are absolutely loved❤️," one fan wrote in the comments section, while another added, "I am so glad that she finally found her happiness ❤️."
Blanco couldn't help but comment on his wife's post, commenting, "ok lil juicy butt," before adding, "i see you."
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR THE ENTERTAINMENT NEWSLETTER
The former Disney Channel star and the record producer confirmed their relationship in December 2023, with Gomez noting they had already been seeing each other for six months.
They later announced their engagement in December 2024 and tied the knot in a private ceremony in September 2025.
"My perspective on it, in a simplistic way, is that I actually feel valued. I feel seen. I feel respected. And I think that’s all I’ve ever really wanted," she told Interview magazine in February 2025. I’ve kind of been alone in the world. I was alone for five years before we got together, and I think that really helped me appreciate someone like Ben."
She went on to say that 10 years prior to the engagement, she doesn't think she would have been "in a space in my life where I could have accepted the kind of patience, the kind of unconditional love that he gives me."
LIKE WHAT YOU'RE READING? CLICK HERE FOR MORE ENTERTAINMENT NEWS
Gomez is currently working on the sixth and final season of "Only Murders in the Building," sharing behind-the-scenes photos from set on Instagram, featuring Steve Martin, Meryl Streep and Olivia Colman.
She has earned six Emmy Award nominations for her work on the show, one for her role as Mabel, and five for her work as executive producer on the series.
John Tortorella opens up about getting fired by Vegas after losing the Stanley Cup Final
Normally, when a coach leads a team to the Stanley Cup Final, even if they lose, they're back behind the bench the following season.
Not former Vegas Golden Knights coach John Tortorella, however.
Despite only taking over with eight games left in the regular season, he led Vegas to the franchise's third Cup final in nine seasons.
But after Vegas dropped Game 6 to the Carolina Hurricanes, the team didn't waste any time announcing that Tortorella would not be returning and that Ryan Craig — coach of Vegas' AHL affiliate, the Henderson Silver Knights — was replacing him.
"I guess the word I’d use is ‘disappointed,’" Tortorella said. "I was honest with Kelly (McCrimmon, Vegas GM). We met the next morning (after Game 6)," Tortorella said in a new interview with The Athletic. "Kelly is very honest, and he let me know within one minute of sitting down in that meeting — he basically told me, ‘Ryan Craig is coaching the team next year.’ I told him what I thought, and we had an honest conversation. I truly respect where the organization is going.
"We didn’t finish the job, and I wanted some more time with that club to try to finish the job. That’s not my call. That’s the general manager and president’s call. You just get about your business after that."
CLICK HERE FOR MORE OUTKICK SPORTS COVERAGE
It's wild how much the Golden Knights embody their city, because, man, do they ever like to gamble, and they're usually on the money. It's insane.
Sure, Craig was the heir apparent, and they wouldn't want to lose him after investing so much in his development.
But Tortorella is a Cup winner (22 years ago, I know, but it still counts), and really had the team firing on all cylinders... so they make a change?
Hey, their last gamble, axing Bruce Cassidy and bringing in Torts, worked out well.
But if the team struggles out of the gate, there's a good chance the front office faces some questions.
Combat vet senator chokes up over fallen friend in fiery floor speech about Iran war: ‘We will finish it’
Sen. Tim Sheehy, R-Mont., choked up on the Senate floor as he pointed to a bracelet honoring a fallen friend he said was "cut in half" by an Iranian bomb, turning a Democratic-led push to rein in President Donald Trump’s war powers into an emotional warning about the cost of failing to confront Tehran.
The Montana Republican and combat veteran delivered the fiery remarks in opposition to an Iran War Powers Resolution that would have forced the removal of U.S. forces from hostilities against Iran unless Congress explicitly authorized the mission. The Senate rejected an effort to advance the measure Thursday in a 47-49 vote, but not before Sheehy accused critics of ignoring decades of Iranian-backed attacks on Americans.
"We didn’t start this war, we did not. But, we will finish it," Sheehy said from the Senate floor. "And forever wars are not popular with anybody these days. Both sides of [the aisle] love to attack our forever wars. And I can promise you, being someone overseas wearing the uniform, when you’re fighting for your country, you don’t care what party’s in office."
REPUBLICANS FALL IN LINE WITH TRUMP ON IRAN WAR DESPITE RISING COSTS AND US DEATH TOLL
Sheehy argued Democrats were right to call the conflict a "war of choice," but said the choice was made by Iran’s regime decades ago — not by Trump.
"This is a war of choice. The Democrats are correct," Sheehy said. "It’s a war of choice that was begun by a radical, lunatic band of terrorists that took over a beautiful nation 47 years ago."
The former Navy SEAL then ticked through decades of attacks he tied to Iran and its proxies, invoking the 1983 Marine barracks bombing, the USS Cole, the Achille Lauro and terrorist groups including Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis.
TRUMP THREATENS 'MAJOR MILITARY PUNISHMENT' FOR IRAN OVER FUTURE HOUTHI ATTACKS
"This regime that we are fighting does not care about our partisan politics," Sheehy said. "They don’t care who you voted for, who you pray to, or where you live. They want to kill all of us. And they don’t just say it, they actually do it. And they’ve been doing it for 47 years."
Sheehy also invoked William Buckley, whom he described as "an American military officer" who was abducted and tortured in the 1980s.
"William Buckley was abducted in 1985," Sheehy said. "He was skinned alive on camera by the Iranians."
The senator concluded by describing Iran's ongoing retaliatory attacks as "the flailing's of a nation in collapse" not strength, citing what he called "an occasional missile strike" on commercial boats and U.S. military members in the Middle East. Meanwhile he encouraged his congressional colleagues to "think about the people who are deployed right now standing on that wall with a loaded weapon who volunteered to defend our country and our way of life" in what Sheehy described as a "just war."
"Last time I checked, we wiped these bastards out ... because they deserve it," Sheehy said. "We did not start a war with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard (IRGC), they started it with us 47 years ago and their attacks have gone unanswered for half a century. It is time to fix this problem and make sure another generation of Americans does not have to fight this murderous, savage adversary."
EXCLUSIVE: ICE removes former NFL player Daniel Ogama Adongo after visa overstay, criminal record
FIRST ON FOX: A former NFL player from Kenya with a criminal record has been removed by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in Chicago, ICE exclusively told Fox News Digital.
Daniel Ogama Adongo, 37, was a linebacker for the Indianapolis Colts until 2015 and has been arrested multiple times over the last decade, including a conviction for criminal mischief with damage in 2020.
He was sentenced to a year in jail.
DHS BLASTS MINNESOTA BOARD FOR UNANIMOUSLY PARDONING ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT CONVICTED OF 3 ASSAULTS
ICE said Adongo overstayed his visa in 2016 and under the Laken Riley act, signed by President Donald Trump last year, those in the country illegally are required to be detained without bond if convicted of certain crimes.
His other arrests include felony intimidation, battery and disorderly conduct, according to officials.
In March, Adongo was ordered to be removed by a Department of Justice immigration judge; the order was carried out on June 20.
"This dangerous individual was clearly a threat to the community, which is now safer since he’s been removed," ICE Chicago Assistant Field Office Director Douglas Thompson said in a statement. "Those who violate immigration law are held equally accountable, including former professional athletes."
Adongo came to the U.S. after he was recruited as a rugby player and played two seasons with the Colts from 2013 until 2015.
"Since Day One, DHS law enforcement has been delivering on President Trump’s promise to the American people to arrest and deport criminal illegal aliens including murderers, rapists, child sex abusers, gang members, and terrorists," ICE said.
TOM HOMAN WARNS ICE SURGE COMING TO NEW YORK CITY AS MAMDANI BOASTS ABOUT SANCTUARY STATUS
It added, "Nearly 70% of ICE arrests are of illegal aliens charged or convicted of a crime in the U.S. More than 3 million illegal aliens are out of the country and counting. Our message is clear: If you come to our country illegally, we will find you, we will arrest you, and we will deport you."
Adongo could not immediately be reached by Fox News Digital for comment.
The surveillance camera on your street corner: lawful spying or constitutionally problematic?
The cameras that scan your car on your commute to work have quietly become one of the most widespread surveillance tools in America.
They record vehicle sightings, feed searchable databases and, when agencies choose to share data, can connect searches across jurisdictional lines.
Recent courts have upheld the particular ALPR networks before them, but they have left open whether a denser, more revealing system could cross the constitutional line.
What are ALPRs?
Automated license plate readers (ALPRs), which are usually small, solar-powered cameras mounted on a pole, building or police car, capture and record where tens of millions of drivers go every day. Flock Safety, one of the leading ALPR vendors, has exploded in popularity with law enforcement, municipalities and businesses in recent years.
The ACLU estimates that there are between 80,000 to 100,000 Flock cameras deployed nationwide.
Flock’s own marketing claims that it is present in more than 6,000 communities, working with more than 1,000 businesses, and more than 5,000 law enforcement agencies nationwide, resulting in billions of vehicle scans per month.
LICENSE PLATE CAMERAS AT HOME DEPOT AND LOWE’S SPARK PRIVACY FEARS
How it works:
ALPRs photograph every passing car, capturing details like license plate number, make, model, color, and other distinguishing features like roof racks, bumper stickers, and scratches to create what Flock calls a "vehicle fingerprint."
This information is then uploaded to a searchable database that can be shared with other agencies when the owning department enables it, typically without a warrant.
Privacy concerns abound.
Privacy advocates, online creators, and concerned citizens argue that the concern isn't any single photograph but the aggregate data. A dense, searchable, cross-jurisdictional archive, they contend, can reconstruct a person's movements, associations and routines over time, providing a mosaic of a person’s life all without a warrant.
In a review of Flock audit logs, the Electronic Frontier Foundation reported finding searches associated with protest activity.
Advocates also point to reported misuse, including allegations that officers ran searches to track partners or acquaintances, and cases in which drivers were stopped and even held at gunpoint after an inaccurate plate scan.
But law enforcement say the tools help them solve crimes more efficiently.
Police departments and Flock counter that a license plate is displayed in public, that officers see only what any bystander can, and that the tool helps them solve crimes more efficiently.
Flock points to data retention limits, user accounts, and audit logs, and cites company data claiming its technology supports more than a million investigations a year.
What does the law say?
Courts have long held that, generally, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy of movements when traveling in an automobile on public roads and with license plate information that is exposed to public view.
WASHINGTON COURT SAYS FLOCK CAMERA IMAGES ARE PUBLIC RECORDS
In March 2026, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held in United States v. Elijah Porter that police use of an LPR system did not constitute a Fourth Amendment search because the system, consisting of around ten cameras, provided only periodic information about a person’s movement, not the whole picture; the court noted the periodic nature of the information captured was "much more" limited than geofence data and cell-site location information.
In Schmidt v. City of Norfolk, a pending appeal before the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, two plaintiffs, one a Norfolk resident and the other a frequent commuter through the city, argued that the city's 176 cameras — retaining 21 days of images — let police retrace residents' movements without a warrant.
A federal judge granted summary judgment to the city, finding the camera network did not reveal enough of the plaintiffs’ movements to constitute a Fourth Amendment search but noted that at some point, ALPR surveillance technology could become intrusive enough to cross constitutional privacy lines.
Notably, building on the 2018 Carpenter decision, the Supreme Court ruled last month in Chatrie v. United States that police conduct a Fourth Amendment search when they obtain a person’s Google Location History (the record of location data that Google keeps on its users).
Though Chatrie involved cell-phone data, not license plate records, ALPR critics claim that Chatrie strengthens the argument that a searchable archive of someone’s past movements is constitutionally different from a single observation.
However, while cellphones can follow someone continuously, ALPR systems are generally fixed to a static location.
BLANCHE URGED TO INVESTIGATE ALLEGED FOREIGN INFLUENCE IN FIGHT AGAINST DATA CENTERS
Meanwhile, Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.) proposed the "Protection Against Mass Surveillance Act" this week to prohibit the federal government from purchasing or using mass tracking tools, in addition to banning states from using federal funding for the same systems.
Saying we need to "ban these dadgum" things, Burchett argues the cameras are warrantless surveillance tools that violate the Fourth Amendment, saying that Americans should never choose between safety and liberty.
Pryce Renfroe contributed to this report.
Trump says Saudi nuclear agreement won't move forward without Abraham Accords: 'They have to be a member'
President Donald Trump said Friday that Saudi Arabia will have to join the Abraham Accords before the United States moves forward with a civilian nuclear agreement, saying the requirement had always been understood during negotiations.
Asked why he appeared to add a new condition after Energy Secretary Chris Wright announced progress on a Saudi nuclear deal, Trump rejected the suggestion that anyone had gotten ahead of him.
"No, nobody got out ahead. I mean, I just say that in order to do it, they have to be a member of the Abraham Accords, which have been very successful. But it's time now that they do it," Trump said.
TRUMP CALLS ON ARAB NATIONS TO SIGN ABRAHAM ACCORDS
Later, when asked whether he had authorized Wright to sign the agreement, Trump maintained the condition was never in doubt.
"Well. We didn't talk about it, but it was always understood. And Chris knew and Saudi Arabia knew that if they joined the Abraham Accords, the deal is not, I'm not going to do the deal," Trump said.
When a reporter followed up by asking why Wright signed the agreement if that condition remained, Trump said any deal would still have to clear Congress and would not move forward unless Saudi Arabia joined the Abraham Accords.
TRUMP'S IRAN DEAL SPARKS GOP DEMANDS FOR VOTE AS CONGRESS REMAINS IN THE DARK
"Because they understood that, subject to Congress and everything else, in order for that deal to go through, they had to sign into the Abraham Accords," Trump said. "We think the Abraham Accords bring peace in the Middle East."
Trump argued the regional security landscape had shifted after Iran's military capabilities were significantly weakened.
"There's no longer an Iran factor. There's no longer Iran to worry about because they've been reduced in terms of their capability and power by many fold," Trump said.
TRUMP SAYS IRAN'S MISSILES 'AREN'T THE PROBLEM' AFTER WHITE HOUSE MADE THEM CENTRAL TO WAR RATIONALE
Trump also emphasized that any agreement with Saudi Arabia would be limited to civilian nuclear energy.
"They'll join and they'll do their civil. It's really, it's civil nuclear. But that's what it is. No enrichment. It's civil nuclear," Trump said.
The remarks came during an Oval Office event celebrating what the administration described as a milestone for advanced nuclear energy after four privately funded reactor companies met Trump's goal of bringing new reactor designs online by the Fourth of July. During the event, Trump hailed what he called a "historic milestone for civilian nuclear energy" and a "renaissance of nuclear power in America."
The White House did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital's request for additional comment.