WE THE PEOPLE: CITIZEN BACKLASH EXPOSES SALZMAN’S SURVEILLANCE HYPOCRISY AS FLOCK CAMERAS ARE SUSPENDED IN ESCAMBIA COUNTY
Months of citizen warnings over privacy, due process and the Fourth Amendment culminated in state action and local suspensions, while state Rep. Michelle Salzman continued to support restrictions rather than a permanent ban.
PENSACOLA, Fla. — After months of public opposition, the Escambia County Sheriff’s Office and Pensacola Police Department suspended their automated license plate reader systems and turned off the cameras.
Francesca Yabraian, a candidate for Florida House District 1, said the next step is clear.
“Now it is time for a permanent ban. The people of Escambia County have made it clear what they want: They do not want warrantless mass surveillance tracking their movements.”
Two days after the local suspensions, Republican state Rep. Michelle Salzman supported restrictions, or “guardrails,” around the technology rather than a permanent ban.
JAN. 15 — LARRY DOWNS JR. CHALLENGES GOVERNMENT OVERREACH
Larry Downs Jr. challenged government surveillance and automated enforcement.
“Y’all think it’s OK for y’all, for our government to treat us like children? What is wrong with you?”
APRIL 23 — JASMINE BROWN CHALLENGES FLOCK FUNDING
At the April 23 Pensacola City Council meeting, Jasmine Brown challenged the use of opioid settlement money for Flock cameras.
“Mayor Reeves took money that was supposed to help our community recover from the opioid crisis, and spent it on Flock cameras to surveil us against our will.”
JUNE 18 — FRANCESCA YABRAIAN WARNS CITY COUNCIL
Yabraian raised due process concerns and pointed to a Broward County case.
“Because this is a violation of people’s due process rights, and that was ruled in Broward County.”
She also warned:
“And there could be class-action lawsuits, force refunds … lawmakers are moving legislation forward to stop local governments from using [these systems] … I would step back and pause, even just turn off the cameras till it hits the Florida Supreme Court.”
JUNE 18 — JACOB ROCKWELL DESCRIBES THE IMPACT
Jacob Rockwell described the burden an automated citation placed on him.
“I object to this system because it violates our basic constitutional right to due process. It shifts the burden of proof entirely onto the citizen, forcing us to prove our innocence against a computer program that doesn’t even verify who is driving the vehicle.”
JUNE 29 — SUPREME COURT ADDRESSES DIGITAL LOCATION PRIVACY
In Chatrie v. United States, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed Fourth Amendment protections involving government acquisition of digital location information.
AUG. 6 — COMMISSIONER STEVE STROBERGER DEFENDS THE CONSTITUTION
At the Aug. 6 Escambia County Commission meeting, Commissioner Steve Stroberger warned:
“A government powerful enough to monitor everyone is powerful enough to abuse everyone.”
He also said the Constitution “is not a buffet where we pick the rights we like and ignore the rest.”
AUG. 25 — PROPOSED CLASS ACTION FILED AGAINST FLOCK
A proposed federal class-action lawsuit was filed against Flock Group Inc., alleging misuse and inadequate safeguards. The claims remain pending in federal court.
Yabraian had warned Pensacola officials on June 18:
“And there could be class-action lawsuits …”
AUG. 29 — JACOB ROCKWELL CHALLENGES SALZMAN
Rockwell made clear that his challenge was not partisan.
“Representative Michelle Salzman and I do not agree on things. In fact, I attack her on numerous policies of hers and we butt heads on social media constantly over programs and legislation she has supported ...”
He called on Salzman to end “Flock, Axon, Motorola, or any mass surveillance network in Florida” and urged her to “stand up for the oath you took and protect the sanctity of Freedom.”
SEPT. 1 — LARRY DOWNS WARNS AGAINST TRADING LIBERTY FOR SAFETY
Downs warned:
“If it will help find missing kids, let’s just go ahead and suspend the Fourth Amendment and allow our government to do periodic, unannounced home inspections.”
After Rockwell’s Aug. 29 public call to end Flock and defend constitutional freedoms, Salzman turned a deaf ear to Escambia County. Once the cameras were shut off, Salzman chose “guardrails” — not the permanent ban the people demanded.
SEPT. 3 — AFTER THE SUSPENSIONS, SALZMAN CALLS FOR “GUARDRAILS”
After the cameras were suspended and turned off, Salzman supported restrictions, or “guardrails,” around automated license plate reader technology rather than a permanent ban.
Salzman said:
“It is a good tool. The conversation is privacy.”
She argued for “guardrails” around the technology instead of supporting the permanent ban citizens were demanding.
SEPT. 5 — YABRAIAN: FUNDAMENTAL DIFFERENCES ON THE FOURTH AMENDMENT
On her campaign website, Michelle Salzman says she is “dedicated to restoring American pride, protecting our freedoms, and putting our people first.”
Yabraian said that is exactly where the fundamental difference lies.
“Michelle Salzman says she is dedicated to protecting our freedoms and putting our people first. But when the people of Escambia County demanded an end to Flock surveillance, Salzman chose ‘guardrails’ instead of a permanent ban. I believe protecting our freedoms means protecting our Fourth Amendment rights — not putting guardrails around technology that chips away at the 4th Amendment. That is where Michelle Salzman and I are fundamentally different.”
At the June 18 Pensacola City Council meeting, Yabraian also pointed to the cross-partisan opposition.
“When you have citizens, people who were united … Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Nonaffiliated come together united on one issue to say that we don’t like this?”
Yabraian concluded:
“As my friend Jacob Rockwell says, ‘It’s a huge win for freedom and liberty in our state.’ But we still have a lot of work to do to secure a permanent ban and lasting protections for our Fourth Amendment rights.”
Different political beliefs. One Constitution. Protect the Fourth Amendment.
For more information about Francesca Yabraian, candidate for Florida House District 1, visit vote4francesca.com chip in to fight for your visit 4th 4th Amendment.
Comments