Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI-12) introduced H.R. 10807 “Get the Flock Out of Our Communities Act” on Oct 13.[1][2] It is the first bill in the U.S. Congress designed to completely prohibit automated mass surveillance technology.[1]

The bill targets automated license plate readers like Flock, biometric surveillance systems, and facial recognition.[1] It prohibits the use of federal funds to purchase, install, maintain, lease, or operate any automated mass surveillance system.[1][5]

Tlaib announced the proposal at a press conference in Inkster, Michigan.[4][5] The city of Inkster just signed a 10-year contract with Flock to expand ALPR coverage.[4] Flock CEO Garrett Langley said the same day at TechCrunch Disrupt that his company has not fired any customers over abuse.[3]

Reporters have documented dozens of officers arrested or fired for stalking using the nationwide network.[3] The bill has six co-sponsors in the House.[2][5]

The bill requires any unit of government in possession of data generated by federally-funded systems to permanently delete that data.[1][5] It also blocks the use of such data in court proceedings.[1] It requires state and local governments to certify they do not operate mass surveillance networks to receive certain federal grants.[1]

Indivisible, Fight for the Future, and Data for Progress publicly endorsed the proposal.[1] Local coverage names eight Michigan cities that already cancelled their Flock contracts.[4] The bill remains in committee stage at both referred committees.[2]

The editorial question: if the U.S. now has three federal letters with Oct 16 deadline plus two federal bills plus one federal Kyle ruling, what clauses does your RFP Flock or Motorola Vigilant or Axon or Genetec require to anticipate the cluster.[3][1]

The first clause is federal-bills-cluster-disclosure clause. The vendor must publish any federal letter received affecting the product, with 14 days notice.[1] The second is federal-funds-conditionality clause. The contract must condition continuity on the vendor certifying annually that no part of the system depends on federal funds.[1] The third is vendor-defense-position clause. The vendor must publicly document its position on each pending bill in Congress.[3]

The Flock CEO insists we should not pause progress.[3] Tlaib answers that Flock does not make us safer and that it is part of an expanded police state.[4] And adds that the mass surveillance crisis is not a dystopian fantasy because it is already here.[1]

P.D. How many of the six pending federal bills would affect your RFP if passed as-written? [unverified]

📰 Source: Rep. Tlaib press release Oct 14 + Congress.gov H.R. 10807 + TechCrunch Oct 14 + Michigan Advance Oct 14 + Spectrum News Oct 15.

Sources

[1] Rep. Tlaib press release (Oct 14, 2026) — https://tlaib.house.gov/posts/rep-tlaib-introduces-bill-to-remove-and-prohibit-flock-cameras-mass-surveillance-technologies [2] Congress.gov H.R. 10807 (119th Congress) — https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/10807/all-info [3] TechCrunch Sarah Perez (Oct 14, 2026) — https://techcrunch.com/2026/10/14/flock-ceo-defends-surveillance-technology-amid-national-backlash-we-shouldnt-pause-progress/ [4] Michigan Advance Katherine Dailey (Oct 14, 2026) — https://michiganadvance.com/2026/10/14/tlaib-unveils-bill-to-prohibit-use-of-federal-funding-for-flock-other-automated-surveillance-tech/ [5] Spectrum News Melanie Tolen (Oct 15, 2026) — https://spectrumlocalnews.com/mi/michigan/news/2026/10/15/flock-out-michigan-legislation