Michael Addison would keep Flock cameras for criminal investigations under statewide safeguards, including judicial approval for prolonged tracking

Michael AddisonUnited Citizens Party candidate for governor of South Carolina, in an email to Dispute Index

Michael Addison, the United Citizens candidate for South Carolina governor, said in an email to Dispute Index that he supports police use of Flock-style cameras to investigate crimes but opposes their use for spying, political targeting or monitoring people at a church, meeting or lawful protest, and proposed six statewide safeguards, including judicial authorization for prolonged tracking and short retention limits.

“I would support these networks only when enforceable safeguards protect both.”

Emailed statement

Read the full email
I support changes to the use of Flock-style license plate camera networks in South Carolina. I support law enforcement using them to investigate crimes and identify vehicles connected to those crimes. I oppose their use for personal spying, political targeting, or monitoring people simply because they attend a church, meeting, or lawful protest. As governor, I would work with the General Assembly to establish clear, enforceable statewide safeguards: 1. Accountable access: Require a documented investigative or emergency purpose for every database search and watchlist entry, restrict access to trained personnel, and log all activity. 2. Judicial oversight: Require judicial authorization for prolonged tracking of a person's movements, with narrow emergency exceptions and prompt judicial review afterward. 3. Limited retention: Set a short, firm deadline for deleting routine scans, allowing longer preservation only for evidence connected to a documented case. 4. Controlled sharing: Prohibit selling the data and unrestricted sharing. Other agencies must identify an authorized purpose and follow the same privacy rules. 5. Accuracy: Require human verification of camera alerts before officers take enforcement action. 6. Enforcement: Require independent audits, public reporting on use and effectiveness, and meaningful penalties for misuse. South Carolinians deserve effective law enforcement and protection of their constitutional rights. I would support these networks only when enforceable safeguards protect both.
Emailed statement from Michael Addison to Dispute Index on Flock license-plate camerasEmailed statement from Michael Addison, October 5, 2026 (UTC).
A close view of a green Flock Safety automated license-plate reader mounted beside a street.
Credit: Bruxton

Where this statement fits

Should Flock-style license-plate surveillance networks exist?

Networked automated license-plate readers record passing vehicles and let agencies search or share travel records across locations. Candidates and officials disagree over whether to prohibit these networks, keep them with legal limits, or defend their use for investigations. This tracker records attributable positions on that choice, including proposals that would affect only public funding or data access.

Read the full case

Source and context

Emailed statement

Emailed statement from Michael Addison to Dispute Index on Flock license-plate cameras
I support changes to the use of Flock-style license plate camera networks in South Carolina. I support law enforcement using them to investigate crimes and identify vehicles connected to those crimes. I oppose their use for personal spying, political targeting, or monitoring people simply because they attend a church, meeting, or lawful protest. As governor, I would work with the General Assembly to establish clear, enforceable statewide safeguards: 1. Accountable access: Require a documented investigative or emergency purpose for every database search and watchlist entry, restrict access to trained personnel, and log all activity. 2. Judicial oversight: Require judicial authorization for prolonged tracking of a person's movements, with narrow emergency exceptions and prompt judicial review afterward. 3. Limited retention: Set a short, firm deadline for deleting routine scans, allowing longer preservation only for evidence connected to a documented case. 4. Controlled sharing: Prohibit selling the data and unrestricted sharing. Other agencies must identify an authorized purpose and follow the same privacy rules. 5. Accuracy: Require human verification of camera alerts before officers take enforcement action. 6. Enforcement: Require independent audits, public reporting on use and effectiveness, and meaningful penalties for misuse. South Carolinians deserve effective law enforcement and protection of their constitutional rights. I would support these networks only when enforceable safeguards protect both.
Emailed statement from Michael Addison, October 5, 2026 (UTC).

About this source

Michael Addison sent this statement by email from his campaign address in reply to a Dispute Index question on Flock-style license-plate cameras. The link is to his campaign website; the statement itself is not published there. The text is reproduced as sent.

Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Before the quotation

Dispute Index asked Addison for his position on Flock-style license-plate camera networks. He replied that he supports "changes to the use of Flock-style license plate camera networks in South Carolina" and that he opposes "their use for personal spying, political targeting, or monitoring people simply because they attend a church, meeting, or lawful protest."

After the quotation

He proposed six safeguards: a documented purpose and logging for every search; "judicial authorization for prolonged tracking of a person's movements, with narrow emergency exceptions"; a short deadline for deleting routine scans; a ban on selling the data; human verification of alerts; and independent audits with penalties for misuse.

How this statement is classified

Mixed or conditional

The label describes this statement's response within the context above.

Why this label?

The case asks whether Flock-style license-plate surveillance networks should exist. Addison supports investigative use but conditions it on enforceable safeguards and opposes surveillance of lawful activity, so we labeled it Mixed or conditional. The strongest remedy he proposes is judicial authorization for prolonged tracking of a person's movements, so we placed it at Warrant on the remedy ladder, although his warrant rule covers prolonged tracking rather than every search.

Recorded on
Published here

More from this case

Read the full case

Stephen Hamilton says he opposes Flock cameras and that government "should not be building a searchable record of where innocent people travel"

Stephen Hamilton

“I oppose Flock cameras because privacy should apply to everyone—including the people who build and operate surveillance technology. If the people behind these systems believe their own photographs, personal information, or movements deserve protection, then why should ordinary Coloradans be treated differently? Government should not be building a searchable record of where innocent people travel. Tell law enforcement to do the job they were hired to do—investigate crimes, pursue criminals, and protect the public without turning every citizen into a surveillance target.”
Read statement

Cite this record

Publisher
The Dispute Index
Title
Michael Addison would keep Flock cameras for criminal investigations under statewide safeguards, including judicial approval for prolonged tracking
First published
Last updated
Permalink
https://disputeindex.com/events/4664-michael-addison-the-united-citizens-candidate-for-south

Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.

The Dispute Index. "Michael Addison would keep Flock cameras for criminal investigations under statewide safeguards, including judicial approval for prolonged tracking". First published: 2026-10-05. Last updated: 2026-10-05. https://disputeindex.com/events/4664-michael-addison-the-united-citizens-candidate-for-south