II. How We Got Here:
   The Architecture of a Nationwide Citizen Database

II-b. License Plate Readers and
Predictive Surveillance Networks

In its November 20th report, AP News described how the US Border Patrol uses its predictive surveillance with a growing network of cameras that extends beyond border states. These cameras are often hidden, and the images are scanned for license plate information. Algorithms evaluate patterns such as unusual routes, repeated trips, or travel at unusual times. [2]

Once identified, federal agencies may enlist local law enforcement to find a pretext to pull a suspect over. The person might be pulled over for something unrelated or innocuous such as speeding or, as CBS News reported, "even a dangling air freshener blocking the view." Once pulled over, the person might be questioned and searched, with no explanation, and they may never realize that law enforcement was monitoring them for something as minor as traveling past a specific camera. [4] [5] [6]

II-c. Potential Data Fusion with Citizenship & Voting Records

As states consider merging or integrating driver license data with federal immigration and/or citizenship data, the infrastructure could easily extend into into voting eligibility and affiliation databases. The Department of Justice has expressed interest in having a system with combined identity and citizenship status in order to centralize eligibility checks for voter fraud enforcement.

IV. The Risks:
   When Data Scales Beyond Control

The consolidation of driver license data, citizenship information, and voter registration records also creates opportunities for selective targeting of specific communities. This raises the risk of politically motivated investigations, discriminatory enforcement, or manipulation of public services. Marginalized communities, including immigrants, racial minorities, and economically vulnerable populations, are historically the most exposed to such practices. Recent events such as racially motivated gerrymandering, deployments of federal forces to politically opposed states, and threats of punitive funding cuts illustrate how easily data can be misused for political advantage.

Another concern is the permanence of the infrastructure itself. Even if expansion stopped tomorrow, the existing systems would continue to operate, and agencies would still have access to accumulated data. Dismantling these systems would require dedicated funding and political will, while future administrations could repurpose or expand their use in ways never originally intended. NPR recently reported on a whistleblower complaint alleging that Social Security and related personal data were copied to a private cloud environment with insufficient safeguards, potentially exposing the records of more than 300 million Americans. [7]

Compounding these risks is the lack of transparency surrounding how data is shared and accessed. Many states do not have a full picture of how their residents’ information moves through the Nlets network, or which federal agencies are making queries. Some law-enforcement agencies maintain contracts with private surveillance vendors under nondisclosure agreements that block public oversight. With covert placement of license plate readers and little mandated reporting, the public has few ways to know what is being collected, how it is being used, or how to challenge improper surveillance.

V. Citizen Action:
   What People Can Do

A large part of the danger of the systems being described here is that much of the work is happening quietly, and becomes an almost imperceptible part of our everyday lives. We sacrifice privacy for convenience, and freedoms for safety. Often these sacrifices are made by marking a checkbox signifying acceptance of a service agreement, without actually reading the agreement.

The good news though is that once people are paying attention, asking questions, and demanding accountability, that can force legislators to enact change. It's not always easy, but it takes numbers, and it takes persistence.

1. Understand how your state's data moves
   Start with the basics: does your state share its DMV and registration data through Nlets? If so, has your state enacted any blocking measures to prevent federal agencies from accessing it, and are there any justifications that federal agencies can use to bypass those measures? In many states, lawmakers were unaware that federal law enforcement agencies were accessing state data. Reuters, AP News, FedScoop, and other media sources can help you stay apprised of any updates.
   
   Following license plate reader news and surveillance news is equally important. Most people don't realize that these systems are operating away from the border, or that their driving patterns may be monitored and analyzed.
   


2. Press state and local officials to draw boundaries
   State government often have more authority than they often make use of. You can ask questions of your state representatives and officers. For example:
   
   
   • Has the state blocked federal access to driver and registration data through Nlets, and if not, why?
   • How many queries do ICE, HSI, or BP make each year? How many queries have they made this year?
   • Is their any oversight or audit process in place for how data is being requested or used?
   
   Audits are standard in many industries, and oversight is not optional for most forms of data that interact with PII. Requiring public disclosure of query volumes, justification categories, and retention timelines is a basic safeguard. Supporting legislation that demands warrants for pattern-based surveillance, or institutes automatic data deletion helps to ensure agencies justify their tools instead of treating them as default.
   


3. Build awareness at the community level
   Community and civil rights groups can help in multiple ways. Civil rights groups are often knowledgeable, while larger groups can inspire a strength-in-numbers confidence. Groups can organize public pressure campaigns, write petitions, and draft form letters to address lawmakers. Many civil rights groups and nonprofits also know of the legal steps to navigate and can help direct the community.
   


4. Demand enforceable guardrails
   No one wants to live in a police state. The public can insist on something simple: surveillance should be done when there is probable cause, and should not become the norm.
   
   
   
   • algorithms should not replace probable cause
   • voters need to have say before enabling nationwide surveillance
   • there needs to be visibility on how data is being collected and used
   • there needs to be oversight and independent audits that publish hard numbers to ensure that rights are not being abused, and our data is not being misused
   
   None of this fixes the system overnight, but each step makes it harder for authorities to operate in the dark.
   

VIII. Conclusion

I tried to stay as objective as I could throughout, but I know there are times that I was unable to do so. In all honesty, much of this stuff I find to be terrifying. A lot of this data already exists at some government level, but most of it is not consolidated. Frequently the republican platform at least says that the federal government needs to allow states to govern. Nationwide databases and surveillance is very much in opposition to this, and in that view is very hard to justify.

Some of the cited references are good starting points for doing your own research on the above topics, and a few other key words worth watching for are 'biometrics', 'privacy', 'surveillance'.

I will try to update this post with additional resources at a later date, along with some info on form letters you can use to write to lawmakers to address concerns.