It's summer in Arizona! A great time to catch a movie or just stay indoors. Join us (inside) for the next council meeting or for a Deflock Movie & Bingo Night.
Deflock Tucson Movie and Bingo Night!
Join us for a two-part movie and bingo night, beginning with a brief open discussion on mass surveillance in Tucson.
● Part 1: Saturday, July 11, 2026 at 7:30 p.m. at Slow Body, 831 E. 17th St.
● Part 2: Thursday, July 16, 2026 at 6:00 p.m. at 5546 E. 4th St.
Free popcorn! Bingo prizes include Deflock Tucson stickers and shirts! Yard signs are also available. Donations welcome.
Follow us on Instagram and Facebook for more details, including Deflock’s Voting Recommendations! More events coming soon!
Deflock at Tucson City Council
On June 23, 2026, the City of Tucson unanimously gave authority to begin the process of selecting a red light / speed camera vendor to install additional cameras at intersections.
In 2015, Tucson voters said no to these cameras and they were banned. Currently, the law states, “The City shall not use, or contract for the use of, such technology or any technology for traffic control that does not produce a human, on-site, eyewitness to violations who is able to testify in court.”
Why oppose red light and speed cameras?
1. Tickets are automatically sent to the car owner, who may not necessarily be the person committing the alleged violation. This shifts the burden of proof to the vehicle owner.
2. A portion of the ticket fees goes to the third-party company processing the tickets, creating a bounty-type contract with incentive to play the system.
3. The choice of intersections where cameras will be installed is questionable, likely being chosen to maximize ticket revenue.
4. There are already 300 ALPRs and live-feed cameras at intersections across the city (view the map on Deflock.org). Data gathered by red light and speed cameras will only add to the “mission creep.” The data collected by these cameras has already been used for purposes other than tracking reckless drivers, arresting misidentified victims throughout the US.
5. Insurance-backed studies claim red light and speed cameras reduce incidents, contrary to independently-funded red light studies with evidence of increased incidents in multiple municipalities throughout the US. Traffic tickets result in higher insurance premiums for the owner.
At the State level, lawmakers have approved a ballot measure requiring local citizen approval for cities to keep using speed and red light cameras. This measure will be on the ballot this November 2026.
Join us at the next council meeting!
The City of Tucson’s next meeting is scheduled for July 21, 2026. Check their website for updates.
University of Arizona
On June 23, 2026, the City approved a $60,000 budget (taken from Local Border Support Program grant funds) for the UArizona to create a plan for Tucson Police to acquire “real-time interdiction technologies aimed at enhancing border security and reducing violent and drug-related crime within the City of Tucson. Specifically, the project will focus on implementing and evaluating the expanded use of Automatic License Plate Reader (ALPR) technology.”
This is not an independent study; UArizona has an interest in maintaining this technology – it has 62 ALPRs (and has invested almost $1,500,000) throughout campus. Funding from TPD, DPS, and Border Security programs have multi-regional collaboration and impacts, which means the City’s actions have an effect on all areas outside of Tucson, too.
UArizona has a history of accepting money from immigration enforcement initiatives. This City-proposed initiative will only act as a biased study, aimed at creating the theory of having done due diligence.
National Updates
SCOTUS ruled on June 29, 2026 in Chatrie v. United States that when cops used a geofence warrant to gather evidence, they conducted a “search” pursuant to the Fourth Amendment (which prevents unlawful search and seizure). Justice Elena Kagan emphasized in her Opinion that “…the police conducted a search when they gained access to Location History data. An individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy in records about his cell phone’s location, and police intrude on that constitutionally protected interest when they demand the information—even though for only a limited time, and from a third-party tech company.”
The Court is monitoring technology as it becomes more invasive. It noted, that “the ‘newfound tracking capacity’ that CSLI [cell-site location information] gives the police ‘runs against everyone’- not just those ‘under investigation’ - and ‘travel[s] back in time,’ making possible a form of surveillance that would have been unknown prior to the digital age.”
The case was sent back to the lower court to decide whether each stage of the search process was authorized under the issued warrant.
On June 29, SCOTUS ruled that police are unable to use geo-fencing to gather evidence without a warrant, after conducting an unlawful “search” violating our Fourth Amendment rights. Justice Elena Kagan emphasized that "[a]n individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy in records about his cell phone’s location, and police intrude on that constitutionally protected interest when they demand the information—even though for only a limited time, and from a third-party tech company."
In 2025, a Missouri man wrote an opinion article criticizing ALPRs and local cops opened a criminal investigation on him. “My experience with the Lenexa PD has, I would say, radicalized me against these automated license plate readers,” resident Canyen Ashworth said. A KCUR investigation discovered Ashworth was tracked by the Lenexa Police Department’s ALPRs after he wrote a column critical of the city’s police.
Using that data and surveillance footage, Lenexa police opened a criminal investigation into Ashworth in 2025, suggesting he was illegally posting memes near city hall.”
Police misuse ALPR technology in Europe too. “A UK officer is under criminal investigation for using AI to fabricate case evidence. US officers were arrested for using Flock ALPR cameras to stalk romantic partners. The response in both countries has been criminal charges, not policy reform.”
Connect with us at events and city council meetings. Tell your representatives that mass surveillance doesn't equal safety and has no place in Arizona. Find talking points, news, and helpful resources on deflocktucson.com.
Join us! Whether you're a local business, group, or individual, we need you! If interested, please reach out to us at deflocktucson@pm.me. Thank you for your support!