Locations of the state’s automated license plate reader cameras must be shared with the public along with information about when Massachusetts State Police troopers search the system’s database, a Suffolk Superior Court judge ruled Wednesday.
The decision comes amid a growing wave of controversy over law enforcement’s use of electronic Flock Safety and other automated surveillance cameras. Several officers across the state are being investigated for alleged misuse of Flock Safety technology, and more than two dozen cities and towns have opted out of using the surveillance technology.
Tim McGuirk, a state public safety spokesperson, said Thursday Massachusetts State Police does not use the Flock Safety cameras.
Court filings state “MSP has acknowledged its use of the ALPR system provided by Vigilant Solutions.”
The ACLU of Massachusetts filed the lawsuit, putting up a five-year fight to obtain information about the locations of the cameras used to surveil drivers on roads across the state, the civil rights organization said in a statement.
The ACLU also sought and won access to when, why, and how often state troopers search the automatic license plate reader system’s database, according to the statement.
“Over the past year, public outrage about secretive police surveillance has exploded across Massachusetts and the nation,” Kade Crockford, director of technology and justice programs at the ACLU of Massachusetts, said in the statement.
“People from cities and towns across the state have been organizing to push back against local police adoption of Flock and other license plate readers,” Crockford said. “But what many residents don’t know is that the Massachusetts State Police maintains its own statewide network of license plate readers.”
Sarah Burgess, a spokesperson for the State Police, said Wednesday night they were looking at the ruling and would have a comment Thursday.
She did not immediately respond to follow-up inquiries from the Globe on Thursday.
The agency had refused to disclose the records, invoking exemptions to public records law pertaining to critical infrastructure and ongoing criminal investigations.
According to court filings, automated license plate reader technology has been used in Massachusetts since 2008. Documents said State Police maintain 80 to 100 of the surveillance cameras across the state, which record license plate numbers, date, time, specific location at the time of the recording, as well as vehicle make, model, color, and distinguishing features such as bumper stickers.
State police argued that publicly disclosing exact locations of the cameras and other information was “detrimental to public safety and “would prejudice the possibility of effective law enforcement,” court documents said.
State Police said that if criminals or terrorists knew the precise locations of the cameras, it might assist them in attempts to cause harm, or prompt them to “alter their travel routes to avoid detection,” according to court filings.
The ACLU applauded the court’s ruling.
“For the past five years, the ACLU of Massachusetts has been trying to pierce the veil of secrecy surrounding these State Police surveillance operations,” Crockford said. “Today, a court ruled that the public has a right to know basic details about where and how police are tracking motorists around the state.”
“The first step towards accountability and oversight is transparency, so this ruling marks a critical moment in the fight for democratic control of police surveillance,” Crockford said.
Officers in Revere, Lynn, New Bedford, and Stow are among those who have gotten into trouble for allegedly accessing databases to look up personal information about victims and ex-girlfriends. The technology is supposed to be used only for legitimate law enforcement purposes.
Tonya Alanez can be reached at tonya.alanez@globe.com. Follow her @talanez.