Khanna warns against a Flock surveillance state
U.S. representative
“We can't have a surveillance state in America”
Open the original interview (opens in a new tab)We asked candidates if San Francisco should keep Flock surveillanceCandidate responses under support, opposition, and no position
Source and context
Interview
We asked candidates if San Francisco should keep Flock surveillance (opens in a new tab)Candidate responses under support, opposition, and no position
About this source
The San Francisco Standard asked local candidates whether the city should renew its Flock contract and recorded their differing answers.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Before the quotation
Khanna spoke on the House floor as members introduced the Flock-Off Act.
After the quotation
He said safety should not come at the expense of privacy.
How this statement is classified
Condemned
Case context: Should Flock-style license-plate surveillance networks exist?
The label describes this statement’s response within the context above.
Why this label?
He rejects the network's surveillance model, while the bill addresses federal funding rather than all local use.
- Recorded on
- Published here
Should Flock-style license-plate surveillance networks exist?
Explore the case context, sources and public responses.
More from this case
Read the full case“Ohioans should not have their movements routinely tracked, photographed, and stored simply for driving on public roads.”Read statement
“Tennesseans should be free from a surveillance state.”Read statement
“We need to restore real limits, real oversight, and real due process.”Read statement