A recent Supreme Court ruling in the Chatrie v. United States case has significant implications for the use of automated license plate readers (ALPRs) in law enforcement. The ruling, which requires a warrant for accessing cell phone location history, addresses fundamental issues about the use of private data by police. This decision suggests that similar restrictions might apply to the use of ALPRs, which currently do not require a warrant and are widely used by police to identify suspects through networks of cameras installed on public roads. Legal experts argue that if ALPR data collection requires a warrant, it could radically change policing by limiting how these cameras are used. Flock Safety, a leading ALPR provider, claims that the ruling does not impact their technology, stating that ALPRs differ from cell phone location tracking as they only capture images of vehicles in public places. However, the decision may still influence how courts view ALPR data, as it highlights concerns about the retrospective and indiscriminate nature of such surveillance. The ruling could also affect other data collection methods like reverse keyword searches and cell tower dumps. Andrew Guthrie Ferguson, a law professor, noted that ALPR data is part of a broader surveillance system that includes social media activity and various video footage, making it similar to cell phone data in revealing personal information. This Supreme Court decision strengthens the case for requiring warrants for ALPR data collection, potentially reshaping modern policing practices.