Washington, DC, Dec. 16, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The New Civil Liberties Alliance filed anย opening brief today urging the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit to reverse a district courtโs dismissal of the Schemel, et al. v. City of Marco Island privacy rights lawsuit. The City of Marco Island has continuously monitored its residentsโ movements for years without suspicion, probable cause, or warrants by using automated license plate recognition systems (ALPRs), in violation of the Fourth Amendment. The U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida dismissed NCLAโs lawsuit against this unconstitutional arrangement by misconstruing U.S. Supreme Court precedent on privacy. ย The Eleventh Circuit should correct the error and send the case back for further proceedings.
The City of Marco Island has strategically installed ALPRs to ensure complete coverage of all traffic on the small island. It stores time-stamped photos of NCLA clients Shannon (Schemel) Druen, Stephen Overman, Michael Tschida, and other residentsโ vehicles, and it compiles this information into an aggregated, searchable database. By retaining this data for at least three years, the City can easily deduce patterns that reveal its residentsโ daily movements. The total extent of this intrusive program remains to be fully revealed, but as alleged, it clearly defies the Supreme Courtโs 2018 ruling in Carpenter v. United States that individuals have a legitimate expectation of privacy in the whole of their movements over time.
The district court in NCLAโs case wrongly interpreted Carpenter to mean that only the governmentโs warrantless access to the technological equivalent of cell-site location informationโcell phone tower data that can be used to track a personโs movementsโviolates peopleโs privacy expectations. That cramped and untenable reading of Carpenter ignores a core goal of the Fourth Amendment: preventing police surveillance that permeates every aspect of an Americanโs life. Fourth Amendment case law dictates that technology, like ALPRs, that did not exist prior to the digital age must be judged based on its particular circumstances and with special attention to the original meaning of the Fourth Amendment.
Whether a specific ALPR scheme violates legitimate expectations of privacy by retroactively revealing peopleโs movements largely depends on how often an individual is surveilled, how much data is collected, whether it is aggregated, and how long it is kept. NCLAโs clients deserve discovery to resolve the full scope of this matter.
NCLA released the following statements:
โThe City of Marco Island cannot compile a large database of its residentsโ movements spanning at least three yearsโthrough which it can piece together details of those residentsโ personal lives and habitsโwithout a warrant based on probable cause. We look forward to the Eleventh Circuitโs reversing this mistaken decision and restoring the fight to uphold our clientsโ privacy rights.โ
โ Andreia Trifoi, Staff Attorney, NCLA
โThe pervasive feeling, and now reality, that the Government is watching and recording you is not consistent with a free people or a free society.โ
โ John Vecchione, Senior Litigation Counsel, NCLA
โALPRs are the next step on the road to a Chinese-style surveillance state. Fortunately, the U.S. Constitutionโs Fourth Amendment protects people from states and municipalities that try to institute warrantless searches.โ
โ Mark Chenoweth, President, NCLA
For more information visit the case page here.
ABOUT NCLA
NCLA is a nonpartisan, nonprofit civil rights group founded by prominent legal scholarย Philip Hamburger to protect constitutional freedoms from violations by the Administrative State. NCLAโs public-interest litigation and other pro bono advocacy strive to tame the unlawful power of state and federal agencies and to foster a new civil liberties movement that will help restore Americansโ fundamental rights.
Joe Martyak New Civil Liberties Alliance 703-403-1111 joe.martyak@ncla.legal
