Loading record
Public disputes concerning personal privacy, private information, unwanted publicity, and the public handling of personal or family matters.
Counts show individual statements. They do not assign an overall position.
2 statements on this page. Dates: September 1, 2026 to September 3, 2026
2 matching statements. Dates: September 1, 2026 to September 3, 2026
2 published statements. Dates: September 1, 2026 to September 3, 2026
2 published statements. Dates: September 1, 2026 to September 3, 2026
2 statements on this page. Dates: September 1, 2026 to September 3, 2026
Role at the time: U.S. representative from North Carolina
Statement summary
Mark Harris cosponsored the Flock-Off Act, H.R. 10221, which would bar federal funds for covered camera systems, including plate readers, subject to exceptions.
“no Federal funds may be obligated or expended, directly or indirectly, by the head of any Government agency or by any recipient or subrecipient of Federal funds (including any State, local, or Tribal government)”
Introduced bill names its original sponsors and prohibits federal funds for covered camera systems, with stated exceptions.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)The reference point is whether networked license-plate reader systems such as Flock should exist and be used. Harris cosponsored a bill that would cut off federal money for covered camera systems, with border and toll exceptions. A funding bar rather than a ban on every use fits Mixed or conditional.
Role at the time: U.S. representative for North Carolina's 8th district.
Statement summary
Harris criticized Flock-style mass surveillance while supporting police access to crime-fighting tools. He favored state and local action and said Congress may need to intervene when surveillance violates Fourth Amendment rights.
“these mass surveillance tools are not something that as Americans that we want to get used to.”
Harris says law enforcement should have tools to protect people, but mass surveillance crosses a line. He favors handling the issue locally and says constitutional violations could warrant federal intervention.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Harris accepts police technology subject to constitutional limits and criticizes mass surveillance. He expresses a conditional approach to continued use rather than a categorical ban.
