YGBKM: Denver Throws Car Owners Under the Bus For Illegals?

H.L. Mencken once observed that democracy offered voters to get the government they wanted — good and hard. His cynicism has found vindication once again in Denver, where the city council voted in May to throw car owners and vehicular assault victims under the bus in favor of expanding their idea of “sanctuary city.” 

Unanimously, I might add, and as Jonathan Turley emphasizes:

The Denver City Council has voted unanimously to shutter a highly successful anti-theft auto license plate tracking system. The system was not closed due to concerns about privacy or finances. It was shut down because Democratic members believed that ICE could use the data to deport illegals.

In May, the council refused to renew the $666,000 contract with Flock for camera monitors around 70 Denver intersections to screen for car theft. That system resulted in the recovery of 170 stolen cars and 300 arrests. It is also credited with key evidence in the investigation of hit-and-run and murder cases.

However, it could also be used to assist ICE, and that is all that matters. Councilman Kevin Flynn explained it is all about Trump’s election: “We know that it can help solve crime. But I think since maybe Jan. 20 of this year, those concerns are greatly heightened and have a new reality about them.”

Is this for real? Indeed it is, and at least initially, the city council made protecting illegal aliens from federal law enforcement its top priority with this change:

“We know that it can help solve crime,” Councilman Kevin Flynn said. “But I think since maybe Jan. 20 of this year, those concerns are greatly heightened and have a new reality about them.”

Flynn was referencing the inauguration of President Donald Trump, who has promised to carry out mass deportations of immigrants who are in this country illegally.

Other agencies beyond the Denver Police Department have access to the data, including some that cooperate with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials. Those who use the information have to attest that they won’t pass it along to ICE, said Denver police Cmdr. Jacob Herrera.

That didn’t get as much praise as the city council imagined, however. When police objected, citizens noticed, and it remains a “hot-button issue” in the Mile High City, ABC’s local affiliate reported two weeks ago. The city council started leaning on the ACLU to claim that license-plate readers violate constitutional rights as an alternate explanation for their refusal to fund the system past the end of this year:

Parady was outspoken against the contract, describing license plate readers as a tool of mass surveillance. She told Denver7 Investigates that the vast majority of crimes are not solved by these cameras.

The American Civil Liberties Union in Colorado agrees with Denver City Council in slowing down the process and asking for public transparency to protect citizens from potential misuse.

“Any sort of dragnet surveillance technology products need the utmost scrutiny,” ACLU Colorado Director of Advocacy Jen Samano said. “I think we can all agree on the outcomes of safety and solving crimes, but how we get there can’t be overlooked. This puts at risk our fundamental constitutional rights if it’s not done properly.”

Professor Turley doesn’t tackle this argument, but I’ll channel my inner Jules Pitt and say, allow me to retort. There is no expectation of privacy for license plates on public roads, as in none, zero, zilch. The license plate is the property of the state, assigned to each vehicle for the express purpose of identification. Any police officer can run any license plate at any time; many patrol cars have automated readers to speed up that process. That is the purpose of those plates, as well as in many states to display the renewal status (in Texas, it’s on the windshield separately). 

Turley quotes council member Sarah Parady being more honest in May about her motive in voting to end the contract:

“We’re living in an era where just this last week, actually, an executive order came out instructing the Department of Justice and the FBI to look for reasons to prosecute local elected officials and activists who they believe are, quote, unquote, obstructing ICE enforcement. This kind of surveillance technology is a gift if you have that kind of ill intent, and the federal government has that ill intent right now.”

Two weeks ago, Parady tried to change the subject:

“Right now, I think the risks outweigh the rewards,” Denver City Councilperson Sarah Parady said. “It’s not that this can’t be a useful tool but that’s the thing about mass surveillance — it’s always a useful tool. If we simply attached a GPS device to every Denverite, we would solve most crimes, but we don’t do that because we have constitutional rights and norms around surveillance.”

Perhaps Denver can heat a few homes with Parady’s strawmen this winter. There is a vast difference between strapping a GPS locator onto “every Denverite,” or even on every car in Denver, and reading the license plates already assigned to these vehicles. The readers work when cars get driven on public streets, and the plates do exactly what they are intended to do by the state of Colorado. The police use that data to find cars already ‘of interest’ to investigators, whether that be stolen vehicles, vehicles involved in hit-and-runs, and so on. The readers identify those vehicles so that police can find them quickly and further their investigations into crimes. 

And that was just fine with Denver’s city council until January of this year … because now that includes  investigating people who enter the country illegally and commit crimes here. Time to throw the victims of other crimes under the bus:

“We acknowledge that today’s environment is much different than when the pilot began in early 2024,” Fuja said in a written statement.

Yes. Today’s environment is an order of magnitude stupider than when the pilot program began. H.L. Mencken is vindicated yet again. And just wait until New Yorkers start to get the government they want good and hard.