Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Border Patrol surveillance network expands across Michigan highways

News

Border Patrol surveillance network expands across Michigan highways

Surveillance camera

Canva

The U.S. Border Patrol and Department of Homeland Security have installed automated license plate reader cameras on Michigan highways as part of a nationwide surveillance network, according to reporting by MLive and the Detroit Free Press.

The cameras are part of a nationwide Border Patrol surveillance network first revealed by an Associated Press investigation and later examined in Michigan by the Detroit Free Press and MLive through a review of state records.


The systems scan and record license plates and use algorithms to flag vehicles considered suspicious.

Installation of the surveillance cameras began under the Biden administration in 2024 and was approved by Michigan state officials.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials told MLive the agency relies on a combination of personnel, technology and infrastructure to identify illegal activity and protect national security.

“As part of that approach, CBP uses license plate readers — often the same systems employed by state and local law enforcement nationwide — to help identify threats and disrupt criminal networks,” a spokesperson said in a statement to MLive.

Border Patrol’s use of license plate readers comes as the technology has become increasingly common among law enforcement agencies.

A Congressional Research Service report found all police departments serving populations of more than 1 million residents and nearly 90% of large sheriff’s offices rely on automated license plate reader technology during investigations.

According to the report, the systems can also collect information such as a vehicle’s make, color, location, and the date and time it was recorded. The technology can then compare that information against law enforcement databases and alert authorities when a vehicle matches one associated with vehicles of interest.

The Michigan Department of Transportation told MLive it does not operate the cameras or have access to the data collected. The agency said permit applications are evaluated based on highway operations and design requirements and are not approved or denied based on the agency submitting the request.

According to the Detroit Free Press, Border Patrol declined to publicly disclose the locations of the cameras, citing security concerns. However, records reviewed by the newspaper confirmed cameras had been installed in Wayne and Macomb counties.

The surveillance network has drawn increased scrutiny as immigration enforcement efforts have expanded.

In Michigan, concerns about privacy and government surveillance prompted lawmakers to introduce House Bills 5492 and 5493 earlier this year. The bipartisan legislation would regulate the use of automated license plate reader systems and establish standards for handling the data they collect. The bills have not yet been approved by the Michigan Legislature.

Immigrant rights advocates have also raised concerns about the Border Patrol surveillance network.

Christine Sauvé of the Michigan Immigrant Rights Center told MLive that many residents may not realize they are being monitored by federal immigration authorities.

“Michiganders going about their business may not realize they are being surveilled by federal immigration agents,” Sauvé said.

Sauvé also questioned the impact the technology could have on drivers who are never informed that a camera may have contributed to a traffic stop.

“Most people will likely not know the camera was the initial cause. This kind of widespread surveillance does not make our communities safer, but it does raise the serious possibility of unlawful searches and constitutional violations,” she told MLive.

Border Patrol surveillance network expands across Michigan highways was first published on Michigan Latino News and was republished with permission.

Angeles Ponpa is the Managing Editor of Latino News Network Midwest, overseeing Illinois Latino News, Wisconsin Latino News, and Michigan Latino News. She is based in Illinois.


Read More

Are State Courts More Protective of Transgender People than Federal Courts?

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that state laws prohibiting trans women and girls from participating on female sports teams do not violate the Equal Protection Clause — the seventh Supreme Court ruling curbing the rights of trans people in just the past 14 months. Since May 2025, the Supreme Court has allowed the Trump administration to ban trans people from serving in the military, upheld a Tennessee law banning gender-affirming care for trans minors, given anti-LGBTQ+ parents a veto over LGBTQ+-inclusive content in their children’s classrooms, endorsed Trump’s policy requiring trans people to list their sex assigned at birth on their passports, reinstated an injunction against policies barring schools from outing trans students to their parents against students’ wishes, and determined that Colorado’s ban on anti-LGBTQ+ conversion therapy must be subjected to strict scrutiny, a form of judicial review that almost no law survives.

However, there may be some cause for optimism. In an article published in The Virginia Journal of Social Policy & the Law, I conducted a comprehensive survey of state court cases that impacted the rights and lives of trans people between 2022 and 2024. The survey showed state courts have an essential role to play in protecting trans people in an increasingly hostile political environment. Amongst some ominous signs for trans rights, there were important signals of hope in the survey.

Keep ReadingShow less
A gavel.

The rule of law, American democracy, constitutional rights, and judicial independence.

Getty Images, David Talukdar

In Texas, People Don’t Kill People, Guns Kill People

It has been said that a good prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. Apparently, that’s not the case in very red Collin County, Texas, where a self-described recovering alcoholic fatally shot his daughter in the chest, only to be let off the hook by a sympathetic grand jury. As a retired justice of the New York State Supreme Court, the case intrigued me and I tried to understand why the prosecutor, upon failing to obtain an indictment, did not try again.

In January 2025, the victim and her boyfriend traveled from England to visit her father at his home in Collin County where the shooting occurred. Although evidence presented to a grand jury cannot be disclosed, it is reasonably assumed that the grand jury was provided with the statement made by the father to the police at the scene immediately following the shooting. In that statement, the father related how he had taken his daughter, at her request, to see his gun, and that when he brought her to his bedroom and removed the gun from a cabinet in which he kept it, “it went off.” He could not recall if his finger had been on the trigger.

Keep ReadingShow less
Citizens in Name Only: What the Supreme Court Can’t Fix
beige concrete building under blue sky during daytime

Citizens in Name Only: What the Supreme Court Can’t Fix

This month, the Supreme Court will rule on Trump v. Barbara, the case that could upend birthright citizenship as we have known it for over a century.

But the current debate over birthright citizenship overlooks the fact that legal citizenship — by birthright or naturalization — has never fully protected marginalized Americans. People of color, women, LGBTQ, and lower-income Americans have long been CINOs: Citizens in Name Only. Throughout our 250-year history, they have lacked full social citizenship - access to social/welfare entitlements, political citizenship – access to voting rights, and cultural citizenship – recognition as members of the American family. So, while a court ruling can determine who gets a U.S. birth certificate, it cannot guarantee societal inclusion.

Keep ReadingShow less
How State Courts Can Help Deflect the Supreme Court’s Latest Blow to Multiracial Democracy

Black and white illustration of voters

State Court Report

How State Courts Can Help Deflect the Supreme Court’s Latest Blow to Multiracial Democracy

With its April ruling in Louisiana v. Callais, the Supreme Court delivered yet another blow to the Voting Rights Act, specifically Section 2, which governs race in redistricting. The decision was sad and utterly predictable, but still nothing short of astonishing. Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the Court’s conservative supermajority, stealthily setting aside 40 years of legal precedent under Section 2 largely on the belief that racism is a thing of the past and extreme partisan gerrymandering is, in effect, a fundamental right of state lawmakers. Callais had a tortured path to the Court, a feature of the case that has undoubtedly been eclipsed by the lawless nature of the ruling itself, all of which reveals that the Supreme Court represents the gravest threat to multiracial democracy in the United States. (I argued as much in a law review article, predicting the outcome and analyzing the ways a Court gone rogue might get to that ruling.)

What’s more? In recent years, the Court has played fast and loose with a “principle” purportedly meant to limit chaos around elections, known as Purcell. But instead of limiting chaos, the Court’s Purcell jurisprudence will hasten and aggrandize the already-problematic impact of the Callais ruling. As the nation’s redistricting wars inevitably continue — in this election season, the 2028 presidential campaign, and even the next decade — state courts can help stave off democratic erosion by resisting the urge to invoke Purcell.

Keep ReadingShow less